Galatians A Translation and commentary by Seumas Macdonald

Contents Galatians 1

Introduction 3

11-5 3

Text 3

Textual Criticism 3

Translation 3

Comments 3

16-9 5

Text 5

Translation 5

Comments 5

110-24 6

Text 6

Textual Criticism 6

Translation 7

Comments 7

21-10 9

Text 9

Textual Criticism 9

Translation 9

Comments 10

211-21 11

Text 11

Textual Criticism 12

Translation 12

Comments 12

31-14 15

Text 15

Translation 15

Comments 16

315-29 22

Text 22

Translation 22

Comments 23

41-11 27

Text 27

Textual Criticism 28

Translation 28

Comments 28

412-20 30

Text 30

Translation 30

Comments 30

421-51 32

Text 32

Translation 32

Comments 33

52-12 35

Text 35

Translation 36

Comments 36

513-26 38

Text 38

Textual Criticism 38

Translation 39

Comments 39

61-10 41

Text 41

Translation 42

Comments 42

611-18 44

Text 44

Translation 45

Comments 45

Introduction In this work I offer you a series of exegetical comments on the text of Galatians I wouldnrsquot quite call

it a commentary but it is lsquoin that directionrsquo For each passage I offer the text from the SBL GNT

followed by textual critical notes a translation into English and then commentary Although I

reference a few authors this is not a complete commentary nor is it offered as a work of published

peer-reviewed academic work

All Scripture quotations are from the SBL Greek New Testament Copyright copy 2010 Society of Biblical

Literature and Logos Bible Software

They are used as per the license for use within a freely distributed work

The rest this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 40 International

License

11-5

Text 11 Παῦλος ἀπόστολος οὐκ ἀπʼ ἀνθρώπων οὐδὲ διʼ ἀνθρώπου ἀλλὰ διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ θεοῦ

πατρὸς τοῦ ἐγείραντος αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν 2 καὶ οἱ σὺν ἐμοὶ πάντες ἀδελφοί ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς

Γαλατίαςmiddot 3 χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς καὶ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 4 τοῦ δόντος

ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ὅπως ἐξέληται ἡμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ αἰῶνος τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος πονηροῦ κατὰ

τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν 5 ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνωνmiddot ἀμήν

Textual Criticism

v3 I read πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου in place of πατρὸς καὶ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Translation

Paul an apostle not from men nor through human agency but through Jesus Christ and God

[the] Father that raised him from the dead 2 and all the brothers with me ndash to the churches

of Galatia

3 Grace to you and Peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ 4 he that gave

himself for our sins so that he might rescue us from the present evil age according to the

will of our God and Father 5 to whom be glory eternally Amen

Comments

The standard epistolary introduction receives a number of distinctive features in 11-5

Firstly the author Paul immediately identifies himself as an apostle and this previews one

of the dominant concerns of the epistle in chapters 1-2 a defence of Paulrsquos gospel

315-29 22

Text 22

Translation 22

Comments 23

41-11 27

Text 27

Textual Criticism 28

Translation 28

Comments 28

412-20 30

Text 30

Translation 30

Comments 30

421-51 32

Text 32

Translation 32

Comments 33

52-12 35

Text 35

Translation 36

Comments 36

513-26 38

Text 38

Textual Criticism 38

Translation 39

Comments 39

61-10 41

Text 41

Translation 42

Comments 42

611-18 44

Text 44

Translation 45

Comments 45

Introduction In this work I offer you a series of exegetical comments on the text of Galatians I wouldnrsquot quite call

it a commentary but it is lsquoin that directionrsquo For each passage I offer the text from the SBL GNT

followed by textual critical notes a translation into English and then commentary Although I

reference a few authors this is not a complete commentary nor is it offered as a work of published

peer-reviewed academic work

All Scripture quotations are from the SBL Greek New Testament Copyright copy 2010 Society of Biblical

Literature and Logos Bible Software

They are used as per the license for use within a freely distributed work

The rest this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 40 International

License

11-5

Text 11 Παῦλος ἀπόστολος οὐκ ἀπʼ ἀνθρώπων οὐδὲ διʼ ἀνθρώπου ἀλλὰ διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ θεοῦ

πατρὸς τοῦ ἐγείραντος αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν 2 καὶ οἱ σὺν ἐμοὶ πάντες ἀδελφοί ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς

Γαλατίαςmiddot 3 χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς καὶ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 4 τοῦ δόντος

ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ὅπως ἐξέληται ἡμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ αἰῶνος τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος πονηροῦ κατὰ

τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν 5 ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνωνmiddot ἀμήν

Textual Criticism

v3 I read πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου in place of πατρὸς καὶ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Translation

Paul an apostle not from men nor through human agency but through Jesus Christ and God

[the] Father that raised him from the dead 2 and all the brothers with me ndash to the churches

of Galatia

3 Grace to you and Peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ 4 he that gave

himself for our sins so that he might rescue us from the present evil age according to the

will of our God and Father 5 to whom be glory eternally Amen

Comments

The standard epistolary introduction receives a number of distinctive features in 11-5

Firstly the author Paul immediately identifies himself as an apostle and this previews one

of the dominant concerns of the epistle in chapters 1-2 a defence of Paulrsquos gospel

Introduction In this work I offer you a series of exegetical comments on the text of Galatians I wouldnrsquot quite call

it a commentary but it is lsquoin that directionrsquo For each passage I offer the text from the SBL GNT

followed by textual critical notes a translation into English and then commentary Although I

reference a few authors this is not a complete commentary nor is it offered as a work of published

peer-reviewed academic work

All Scripture quotations are from the SBL Greek New Testament Copyright copy 2010 Society of Biblical

Literature and Logos Bible Software

They are used as per the license for use within a freely distributed work

The rest this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 40 International

License

11-5

Text 11 Παῦλος ἀπόστολος οὐκ ἀπʼ ἀνθρώπων οὐδὲ διʼ ἀνθρώπου ἀλλὰ διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ θεοῦ

πατρὸς τοῦ ἐγείραντος αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν 2 καὶ οἱ σὺν ἐμοὶ πάντες ἀδελφοί ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς

Γαλατίαςmiddot 3 χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς καὶ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 4 τοῦ δόντος

ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ὅπως ἐξέληται ἡμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ αἰῶνος τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος πονηροῦ κατὰ

τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν 5 ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνωνmiddot ἀμήν

Textual Criticism

v3 I read πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου in place of πατρὸς καὶ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Translation

Paul an apostle not from men nor through human agency but through Jesus Christ and God

[the] Father that raised him from the dead 2 and all the brothers with me ndash to the churches

of Galatia

3 Grace to you and Peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ 4 he that gave

himself for our sins so that he might rescue us from the present evil age according to the

will of our God and Father 5 to whom be glory eternally Amen

Comments

The standard epistolary introduction receives a number of distinctive features in 11-5

Firstly the author Paul immediately identifies himself as an apostle and this previews one

of the dominant concerns of the epistle in chapters 1-2 a defence of Paulrsquos gospel

intertwined with his apostleship The qualifications he gives direct our attention first

negatively to the source (not from men) and the agency (nor by men) of his apostleship

then positively to the agency of Jesus Christ and the source A strict distinction between

source and agency is probably overblown here so that Paulrsquos double statement has a

certain highlighting of its non-human origins The qualification of God the Father as lsquothe one

that raised him from the deadrsquo is the only reference to resurrection in Galatians and yet its

prominent position in identifying the very God who is the source of Paulrsquos apostleship

reinforces its prominence in his gospel despite its absence from the bulk of the epistle

The reference to the brothers with him reminds us that Paulrsquos epistolary and pastoral work

was not done in isolation but in community

The addressees the churches of Galatia are a source of scholarly contention For myself I

favour a Southern Galatian hypothesis The reference to multiple churches suggests multiple

gatherings of Christians and reinforces the notion from elsewhere the ἐκκλεσία properly

refers in early Christian literature to a local community

The twin greeting of grace and peace combines the distinctive Jewish salutation shalom

with the uniquely Christian emphasis on grace forming a typical Pauline address Some

suggest the grammar of this verse is open to being read as lsquoGod ndash our Father and the Lord

Jesusrsquo as a statement of Jesusrsquo divinity While this is possible I am unconvinced the Greek

reads so straightforwardly It can well be agreed though that Jesusrsquo divinity is attested on

other NT grounds and conceded that Jewish 1st century authors would not invite such

ambiguity frivolously That the Christ is identified further in v4 matches the further

description of the Father in v1 giving us a rounded presentation of both death and

resurrection with the clear gospel statement of lsquothe one giving himself for our sinsrsquo This is

the core of Paulrsquos gospel message which is part and parcel of the content of the Galatian

epistle

The purpose clause introduced gives an eschatological note to Paulrsquos gospel and epistle lsquothis

present evil agersquo picking up apocalyptic language However a full-blown apocalypticism of

genre or outlook is impossible to sustain from the rest of the epistle Thus it is better

characterised as part of Paulrsquos eschatology The present age is passing done with and the

new age has come into which we are rescued by Christrsquos salvific death The importance of

time is also previewed here

The death and rescue are both lsquoaccording to the will of our God and Fatherrsquo and so reveal

and accomplish the divine purpose which cannot be thwarted This final statement leads

Paul naturally into praise as he offers up a doxological conclusion to his introductory

statements

16-9

Text 6 Θαυμάζω ὅτι οὕτως ταχέως μετατίθεσθε ἀπὸ τοῦ καλέσαντος ὑμᾶς ἐν χάριτι Χριστοῦ εἰς ἕτερον

εὐαγγέλιον 7 ὃ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλοmiddot εἰ μή τινές εἰσιν οἱ ταράσσοντες ὑμᾶς καὶ θέλοντες μεταστρέψαι τὸ

εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 8 ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐὰν ἡμεῖς ἢ ἄγγελος ἐξ οὐρανοῦ εὐαγγελίζηται ὑμῖν παρʼ ὃ

εὐηγγελισάμεθα ὑμῖν ἀνάθεμα ἔστω 9 ὡς προειρήκαμεν καὶ ἄρτι πάλιν λέγω εἴ τις ὑμᾶς

εὐαγγελίζεται παρʼ ὃ παρελάβετε ἀνάθεμα ἔστω

Translation

16 I am amazed that are deserting so quickly from the one that called you by the grace [of

Christ] to another gospel 7 which is not another [gospel]12 except there are some troubling

you and wishing to pervert the gospel of Christ 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven

preach the gospel [to you] different from what we preached to you let him be anathema39

As we said before4 and now I say again if someone preaches to you different than what you

received let him be anathema

Comments

Unlike most of his letters and letters in general Galatians omits any thanksgiving and

moves directly into astonishment The cause of his astonishment is not the celerity of their

abandonment so much as the desertion itself couple with its speed Theodoret and

Chrysostom both highlight that the desertion is spoken of as not lsquofrom the gospelrsquo but from

God himself to heighten the immensity of their abandonment The mention of lsquocallingrsquo here

again previews significant latter themes in the letter The play in vv6-7 about the gospel

hinges on the fact that in Paulrsquos view another gospel is by definition not a gospel at all

Thus he is forced into speaking of it in one instance as lsquoa different gospelrsquo but then denying

its very gospel-like nature since the message they are turning to is not gospel

v7 also introduces us more directly to the Galatian Opponents They are described here as

lsquothose troublingrsquo the Galatians and lsquowishing to pervert the gospel of Christrsquo Paul has no

hesitation about casting them in the most negative light possible since at stake is the very

gospel message of Paul and thus the eternity of the Galatian believers This leads into the

twice-over warning and anathema lsquoWersquo in v8 should probably be understood as Paul and

his entourage though the primary originator of such preaching is Paul himself It is worth

noting the complement between lsquodifferent from what we preachedrsquo and lsquodifferent from

what you receivedrsquo The language of ἀνάθεμα picks up the OT cultic language of given over

to destruction and so indicates falling under the wrath of God in judgment

1 a different gospel can never be another lsquogospelrsquo that is by definition there is one gospel and so something that was a different gospel could not actually be a gospel 2 re the gospel there is no argument in Galatians about whether Jesus is Lord the question is not one of lsquothe gospel = Jesus is Lordrsquo what is up for grabs is how do you stay or enter into a relationship with God 3 given over to destruction cultic language of 4 does he mean something he said earlier as part of his ministry or is it a reference to verse 8

It is unclear from the text itself whether lsquoas we said beforersquo should be taken to refer to

Pauline teaching in Galatia which he is seeking to remind them of or as a communicative

device referring simply back to v8 and so simply drawing attention to the gravity of Paulrsquos

warning message

Pauls opening gambit highlights the main concern especially of chapters 1-2 that of

defending his gospel against the Opponents who he perceives to be peddling an alternate

and thus deficient and deceptive gospel Pauls defence will come in two parts as he

shows both the independent origin and the lack of difference from the Jerusalem apostles

of his gospel

110-24

Text 10 Ἄρτι γὰρ ἀνθρώπους πείθω ἢ τὸν θεόν ἢ ζητῶ ἀνθρώποις ἀρέσκειν εἰ ἔτι ἀνθρώποις ἤρεσκον

Χριστοῦ δοῦλος οὐκ ἂν ἤμην

11 Γνωρίζω γὰρ ὑμῖν ἀδελφοί τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τὸ εὐαγγελισθὲν ὑπʼ ἐμοῦ ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν κατὰ

ἄνθρωπονmiddot 12 οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐγὼ παρὰ ἀνθρώπου παρέλαβον αὐτό οὔτε ἐδιδάχθην ἀλλὰ διʼ

ἀποκαλύψεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ

13 Ἠκούσατε γὰρ τὴν ἐμὴν ἀναστροφήν ποτε ἐν τῷ Ἰουδαϊσμῷ ὅτι καθʼ ὑπερβολὴν ἐδίωκον τὴν

ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐπόρθουν αὐτήν 14 καὶ προέκοπτον ἐν τῷ Ἰουδαϊσμῷ ὑπὲρ πολλοὺς

συνηλικιώτας ἐν τῷ γένει μου περισσοτέρως ζηλωτὴς ὑπάρχων τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων 15

ὅτε δὲ εὐδόκησεν ὁ ἀφορίσας με ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός μου καὶ καλέσας διὰ τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ 16

ἀποκαλύψαι τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ ἵνα εὐαγγελίζωμαι αὐτὸν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν εὐθέως οὐ

προσανεθέμην σαρκὶ καὶ αἵματι 17 οὐδὲ ἀνῆλθον εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα πρὸς τοὺς πρὸ ἐμοῦ ἀποστόλους

ἀλλὰ ἀπῆλθον εἰς Ἀραβίαν καὶ πάλιν ὑπέστρεψα εἰς Δαμασκόν

18 Ἔπειτα μετὰ ἔτη τρία ἀνῆλθον εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ἱστορῆσαι Κηφᾶν καὶ ἐπέμεινα πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡμέρας

δεκαπέντεmiddot 19 ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου 20 ἃ δὲ

γράφω ὑμῖν ἰδοὺ ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ ὅτι οὐ ψεύδομαι 21 ἔπειτα ἦλθον εἰς τὰ κλίματα τῆς Συρίας καὶ

τῆς Κιλικίας 22 ἤμην δὲ ἀγνοούμενος τῷ προσώπῳ ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς Ἰουδαίας ταῖς ἐν Χριστῷ 23

μόνον δὲ ἀκούοντες ἦσαν ὅτι Ὁ διώκων ἡμᾶς ποτε νῦν εὐαγγελίζεται τὴν πίστιν ἥν ποτε ἐπόρθει 24

καὶ ἐδόξαζον ἐν ἐμοὶ τὸν θεόν

Textual Criticism

v11 γάρ vs δέ Almost balanced textual support One suspects the meaning is not overly

affected by the variation

v15 εὐδόκησεν + [ὁ Θεός] The addition has numerous textual witnesses but important

texts omit it It probably should be omitted since its insertion is explicable by a desire to

bring out the implied subject of εὐδόκησεν Its omission conversely would be difficult to

explain

v18 Κηφᾶν is supported by strong textual witnesses while Πέτρον is almost certainly a later

substitution of the more familiar Greek name for the apostle Such a variation occurs several

later times in the epistle which I will simply note without comment

Translation

10 For do I now persuade men or God or do I seek to please men For if I still were

pleasing men I would not be a slave of Christ 11 For I make known to you brothers the

gospel proclaimed by me that it is not merely human in nature 12 For neither did I receive

it from men nor was taught it but through a revelation of Jesus Christ 13 For you heard my

way of life formerly in Judaism that I persecuted the church of God in an extreme manner

and attempted to destroy it 14 and was advancing in Judaism beyond many of the cohort of

my generation being an extreme zealot for my ancestral traditions 15 But when [God]

having set me apart from my motherrsquos womb and calling me through his grace 16 revealed

his son in me so that I might preach him among the nations [Gentiles] I did not

immediately consult with flesh and blood 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those apostles

that precede me but I departed into Arabia and returned again to Damascus 18 Then after

three years I went up to Jerusalem to pay an inquiring visit to Kephas and I stayed with him

fifteen days 19 but another of the apostles I did not see except Jacob the brother of the

Lord 20 which things I write to you see Before God I am not lying 21 Then I went into the

regions of Syria and Cilicia 22 I was unknown by face to the churches of Judaea that are in

Christ 23 They only were hearing that the one formerly persecuting them now preached the

Faith which formerly he sought to destroy 24 and they glorified God because of me

Comments

Although some read πείθω and ἀρέσκειν as having virtually the same force I think it better

to give each an independent force So Paul raises the question about (a) persuading and (b)

pleasing and implies a dichotomy between the two Is the object of his persuasive efforts

God or men The second clause of 10 lsquoor do I seek to please menrsquo along with the answer in

10c resolves the rhetorical questions Paul isnrsquot making a rhetorical defence before God

since he has no need to persuade God nor purpose in doing so but rather seeks to please

God On the other hand his persuasive attempts are directed towards human beings which

is why he doesnrsquot seek to please human beings In 10c Paul suggests that service (slavery) to

Christ necessarily rules out pleasing men This verse sets up the tone of the rest of the

passage which will launch into Paulrsquos defence of his gospel and apostleship

v11 then functions as a Topic sentence about the nature and origin of Paulrsquos gospel It is not

κατὰ ἄνθρωπον lsquoaccording to menrsquo which should probably be understood as lsquobeing human

in nature and characteristicsrsquo The reason for its non-human character is v12 its non human

origins ndash neither received (the passing on of tradition) from a human being nor taught it

but by a direct supernatural revelation whose agent and source if Jesus Christ

Paulrsquos backing (γὰρ) for the radical nature of this revelation is point to his former way of life

lsquoin Judaismrsquo However we want to read the parting of the ways Paul is prepared to see his

former life as part of a distinct religious identity of lsquoJudaismrsquo There is real irony that to

lsquoadvance in Judaismrsquo was to lsquopersecute τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ a phrase which has the

Jewish identity of lsquoIsraelrsquo but which Paul now situates as lsquoGodrsquos assemblyrsquo To advance in

Judaism was to persecute the Israel of God (cf 616) Though I would be reluctant to assert

any literary or direct connection the zeal for τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων matches well

with Jesusrsquo own engagement with the Pharisaical schools as in Mark 71-23

The construction of v15 is odd partly because the flow of thought introduced by lsquobut when

God was pleasedrsquo is interrupted by an extended description of God in terms of Paulrsquos

setting-apart from the womb and calling The phrase is drawn from Isaiah 491 with further

correspondence to Jeremiah 15 and situates Paulrsquos calling in terms of the Old Testament

prophets What other category for calling would Paul have drawn upon For this reason I

cannot sanction interpretations that want to deny a conversion experience to Paul in place

of a lsquocallingrsquo experience Paulrsquos radical thennow JudaismChrist constructions rules out a

purely intra-Judaism development

The nature of Paulrsquos calling is specified in v16 to preach the gospel to the nations Nations

here should be understood in its typical sense lsquoGentilesrsquo hence my inclusion in brackets

Thus Paulrsquos calling and conversion to some extent coincide Whether v16 ἐν ἐμοί is to be

taken as lsquoin mersquo as the location of the revelation or else instrumentally lsquoby mersquo to Paulrsquos

ongoing revelation of the Christ through his preaching is open to debate Though Paulrsquos

ongoing preaching is logically dependent upon the revelation of the Christ to him

Paul now emphasises the autonomy of his initial period He did not lsquoconsult with flesh and

bloodrsquo ndash reinforcing his earlier comment in v12 about the non-human origin and teaching of

his gospel v17 likewise disassociates his gospel activity from the Jerusalem-apostles Rather

Paul went to Arabia (ie the Nabataean kingdom) and specifically Damascus

The three year gap before Paul visits Jerusalem gives his gospel and apostleship a lsquodistancersquo

from the Jerusalem apostles which serves as Paulrsquos defence of its independence He does

not deny dealing with the Jerusalem apostles but is keen to delineate his autobiography in

terms that demonstrate that independence So v18 he mentions his visit to Kephas (Peter)

which lasted 15 days and involved no other major Jerusalem identities beyond Jacob

(James) the brother of Jesus v20 is a meta-comment upon the narrative itself ndash Paul draws

attention to his self-disclosure and attests to his truthfulness v21-24 summarise events

beyond that initial visit ndash his return into Syria and Cilicia the fact that he was not acquainted

in person with Judean churches and they praised God

We might also note that Paulrsquos visit to Jerusalem here is informal There is not delegation

no officiality just Paul coming to Jerusalem and meeting two Christian leaders He is again

emphasising that he didnrsquot lsquogetrsquo his gospel on this occasion Indeed cross-checking with Acts

reveals his prior gospel ministry Secondly lsquothe Faithrsquo in v23 is a remarkably Christian

expression since Christianity as a religion is built upon lsquoFaithrsquo To speak of other religious

traditions as lsquofaithsrsquo is to import a key Christian distinctive into them that is not necessarily

present So Paul can speak of preaching the Faith in a unique sense of the word This

section 111-24 repeatedly hammers the defence of the source of Paulrsquos gospel and Paulrsquos

apostleship

21-10

Text 21 Ἔπειτα διὰ δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν πάλιν ἀνέβην εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα μετὰ Βαρναβᾶ συμπαραλαβὼν καὶ

Τίτονmiddot 2 ἀνέβην δὲ κατὰ ἀποκάλυψινmiddot καὶ ἀνεθέμην αὐτοῖς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ κηρύσσω ἐν τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν κατʼ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς δοκοῦσιν μή πως εἰς κενὸν τρέχω ἢ ἔδραμον 3 ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ Τίτος ὁ σὺν

ἐμοί Ἕλλην ὤν ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναιmiddot 4 διὰ δὲ τοὺς παρεισάκτους ψευδαδέλφους οἵτινες

παρεισῆλθον κατασκοπῆσαι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ἡμῶν ἣν ἔχομεν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα ἡμᾶς

καταδουλώσουσινmdash 5 οἷς οὐδὲ πρὸς ὥραν εἴξαμεν τῇ ὑποταγῇ ἵνα ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίου

διαμείνῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς 6 ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τιmdash ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι διαφέρειmiddot

πρόσωπον θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνειmdash ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο 7 ἀλλὰ

τοὐναντίον ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς 8

ὁ γὰρ ἐνεργήσας Πέτρῳ εἰς ἀποστολὴν τῆς περιτομῆς ἐνήργησεν καὶ ἐμοὶ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη 9 καὶ γνόντες

τὴν χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι Ἰάκωβος καὶ Κηφᾶς καὶ Ἰωάννης οἱ δοκοῦντες στῦλοι εἶναι δεξιὰς

ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρναβᾷ κοινωνίας ἵνα ἡμεῖς εἰς τὰ ἔθνη αὐτοὶ δὲ εἰς τὴν περιτομήνmiddot 10 μόνον τῶν

πτωχῶν ἵνα μνημονεύωμεν ὃ καὶ ἐσπούδασα αὐτὸ τοῦτο ποιῆσαι5

Textual Criticism

πάλιν ἀνέβην in v1 has both early and diverse attestation The reverse order is supported by

mainly Western texts In any case the significance would be virtually zero

In v5 several texts omit οἷς which grammatically smooths the text omission of οὐδέ on the

other hand might harmonise Paulrsquos yielding with Act 163 (so Metzger conjectures) but

would run directly contrary to Paulrsquos Galatian argument

v9 the reading of the names is altered in some texts with the more familiar Πέτρος

substituted for Κηφᾶς and brought to the front for prominence

Translation

1 Then after 14 years I again went up to Jerusalem taking with me Barnabas and Titus 2 I

went up in accordance with a revelation and I presented to them the gospel which I preach

among the nations privately to those that seemed good lest somehow I am running or

have run in vain 3 but not even Titus who was with me being a Greek was compelled to be

circumcised 4 now on account of the snuck-in pseudo-brothers who snuck in to spy out our

liberty which we have in Christ Jesus that they might enslave us 5 to whom not even for an

hour did we yield to subjugation so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you

6 But from those that seemed to be something ndash whatever they were formerly matters

nothing to me (God does not judge men at face-value) ndash for those who seemed to be

5 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 2

regarded added nothing to me 7 but rather seeing that I have been entrusted with the

gospel of the uncircumcision just as Peter of the uncircumcision 8 for the One operating

through Peter for the apostolate of the uncircumcised worked also through me to the

nations 9 and knowing the grace that was given to me Jacob and Kephas and John those

seeming to be pillars gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship so that we unto

the nations and they unto the circumcision 10 only that we should remember the poor6

which this very thing I was eager to do

Comments

The temporal sequencing of Paulrsquos autobiographical material continues with the initial

Ἔπειτα The 14 year gap between Paulrsquos first initial visit and this second visit again confirms

Paulrsquos autonomous gospel ministry Commentators divide over whether this visit accords

with Acts 15 Acts 11 or another occasion altogether Given that the council in Acts 15

provides a clear statement of Gentile law-observance it seems odd that Paul would not cite

nor bring that letter to bear on the Galatian scenario if this visit coincided with the Acts 15

narrative For this reason I am inclined to see this visit as either corresponding to the Acts 11

visit or another unspecified visit to Jerusalem

Paul cites three different reasons for his visit to Jerusalem on this occasion Firstly it is in

accordance with a revelation Paul does not identify whether this revelation in particular

was given to him directly In any case it grounds Paulrsquos movements in Godrsquos activity and

purpose Secondly he presents to lsquothemrsquo his gospel in conjunction with the third reason to

ensure his gospel work wasnrsquot in vain

Understandably it can seem that Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel to the Jerusalem leaders

is to gain their approval but broader considerations render this unlikely Paul has been

arguing for the God-revealed autonomous nature of his gospel He doesnrsquot personally need

the Jerusalem leadersrsquo approval or blessing No rather Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel is to

confirm the unity of his gospel with the Jerusalem leaders the Jewish-apostolate and so to

reject claims that Paulrsquos gospel work was half-done which left open a path for his Judaising

opponents to sneak in and lsquocompletersquo Paulrsquos gospel work

At this point attention to pronouns becomes more necessary I think a good case can be

maintained that the language of lsquowersquo throughout most of Galatians refers to Jewish-

background believers in Christ while lsquoyoursquo has in view Gentile-background believers ie the

Galatians So Paul notes that Titus though a Greek was not compelled to be circumcised

The Jerusalem church did not require entrance and observance of Torah from a Gentile-

believer

The grammar of 4-6 is somewhat discontinuous All of verse 4 prepares for verse 5 so that

Paulrsquos refusal to yield is the main concept The false-brothers of verse 4 are the Jerusalem

6 Who are the poor The marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the poor in general which is an expression of Christian faith

counterparts to the opponents in Galatia ndash Judaising believers who seek Torah-observance

The lsquoour libertyrsquo in v4 refers to the very liberty that even Jewish-background believers in

Christ have a freedom from the Law which Paul will elaborate latter in the epistle Yet

Paulrsquos defence of his liberty has the Gentiles in view ndash v5 Gentile freedom from Law-

observance depends upon Jewish freedom from the same

In verse 6 Paul notes that the Jerusalem leaders added nothing additional to his gospel This

matches his purpose in coming to Jerusalem ndash to attest to the agreement in gospel

proclamation between his gospel and their gospel so that the unity of the gospel might be

established not so that Paulrsquos gospel might be approved Thus Paul defends both the

autonomy of his gospel and its congruity with the other apostlesrsquo message

Paulrsquos repeated disavowal of respect for status in these verses also deserves some

comment The δοκεῖν language should not be treated as suggesting insincerity as if Paul

were saying lsquothose who seemed to be something (but arenrsquot)rsquo This is an English connotation

to the language of lsquoseemingrsquo that does not apply in the Greek Paulrsquos point is probably rather

that being unacquainted with the Jerusalem church these were those who did indeed

appear to him to be important and proven leaders Yet he also makes the point that

lsquowhatever they were formerly matters nothing to mersquo The presence of the word ποτε

suggests that Paulrsquos disconcern for their status has more to do with their former way of life

indeed all our former ways of life than present reality His aside that πρόσωπον [ὁ] θεὸς

ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει draws from Dt 1017 with some minor alterations The concept is

prominent elsewhere in James in referring to Godrsquos impartiality

Verses 7-8 then concentrate on the difference between Paul and the Jerusalem leaders The

expressions τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας and τῆς περιτομῆς should be understood as the

receivers of that gospel proclamation so that Paulrsquos apostolate extends to the Gentiles

whereas Peterrsquos focuses on the Jews This division of mission fields is confirmed in v9 with

the right hand of fellowship given to Paul and Barnabas for their Gentile-mission work The

final comment of v10 may sound like an addition to Paulrsquos teachings but Paul emphasises

that it is already his own concern There is some debate about who lsquothe poorrsquo are whether

the marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the

poor in general as an expression of Christian faith In light of the ethical dimensions of later

Galatians I would suggest that it is the economically poor within the Christian community

and in light of the historical factors particularly those suffering in connection with the

Jerusalem church

211-21

Text 11 Ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν Κηφᾶς εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ ἀντέστην ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦνmiddot 12 πρὸ

τοῦ γὰρ ἐλθεῖν τινας ἀπὸ Ἰακώβου μετὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν συνήσθιενmiddot ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον ὑπέστελλεν καὶ

ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτόν φοβούμενος τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς 13 καὶ συνυπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ

Ἰουδαῖοι ὥστε καὶ Βαρναβᾶς συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει 14 ἀλλʼ ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ

ὀρθοποδοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ ἔμπροσθεν πάντωνmiddot Εἰ σὺ

Ἰουδαῖος ὑπάρχων ἐθνικῶς καὶ οὐκ Ἰουδαϊκῶς ζῇς πῶς τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις Ἰουδαΐζειν 15 Ἡμεῖς

φύσει Ἰουδαῖοι καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἐθνῶν ἁμαρτωλοί 16 εἰδότες δὲ ὅτι οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν ἵνα

δικαιωθῶμεν ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται

πᾶσα σάρξ 17 εἰ δὲ ζητοῦντες δικαιωθῆναι ἐν Χριστῷ εὑρέθημεν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἁμαρτωλοί ἆρα Χριστὸς

ἁμαρτίας διάκονος μὴ γένοιτοmiddot 18 εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομῶ παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν

συνιστάνω 19 ἐγὼ γὰρ διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον ἵνα θεῷ ζήσωmiddot Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαιmiddot 20 ζῶ δὲ

οὐκέτι ἐγώ ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστόςmiddot ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ

ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ 21 οὐκ ἀθετῶ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦmiddot εἰ γὰρ διὰ

νόμου δικαιοσύνη ἄρα Χριστὸς δωρεὰν ἀπέθανεν

Textual Criticism

12 τινας τινα ndash the manuscript support for the former is strong and diverse and the former

reading is more logical in the context

12 ἦλθον ἦλθεν ndash the manuscript support is slightly more even on this variation but the

former reading is preferable matching the τινας of the preceding

Translation

11 But when Kephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face because he was

condemned 12 for before the coming of certain men from Jacob he ate together with the

Gentiles but when they came he drew back and separated himself fearing those of the

Circumcision 13 and the remaining Jews joined him in hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was

led astray by their hypocrisy 14 But when I saw that they were not dealing straight in line

with the truth of the gospel I said to Kephas before all ldquoIf you being a Jew do not live in a

Jewish manner why do you compel the nations to Judaise 15 We by nature are Jews and

not sinners of the Nations 16 but knowing that a human being is not justified by the works

of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ even we believed in Christ Jesus so that we

might be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law because by the works of the

law all flesh will not be justified 17 But if we are found to be seeking to be justified in Christ

and are ourselves sinners then is Christ a servant of sin Not so 18 For I through the law

died to the law so that I might live to God I have been co-crucified with Christ 20 and I no

longer live but Christ lives in me what I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God

that loved me and gave himself on my behalf 21 I do not nullify the grace of God for if

through the law came righteousness then Christ died vainly

Comments

In verse 11 we have both the continuations of Paulrsquos temporally marked biographical

defence but also the introduction of a new sequence Peter comes to Antioch and there is

a division between Peter and Paul which Paul goes on to relate Paul gives the reason for his

strong opposition ndash Peter lsquowas condemnedrsquo This may be understood as lsquoPeter stood

condemnedrsquo by his actions Paul then explains the basis for Peterrsquos condemnation in verse

12 His former practice was to share table-fellowship to eat with the Gentile believes (with

lsquothe nationsrsquo) an action that Paul understands as being in line with the Gospel message

And indeed Peter does too based upon Acts at least Yet a new party comes to Antioch

lsquocertain men from Jacob (James)rsquo While Peter and James certainly represent a Christianity

more deeply embedded in Jewish cultural practices it is a mistake to overread this diversity

Debate continues about how we should understand the relationship between these men

and James himself Are they authorised Do they represent James and Jamesrsquo position Acts

15 suggests not On this basis I am inclined to see the party as a group associated with

Jamesrsquo more Jewish Christian practice but more conservative than James himself and not

an authorised delegation by any means They have some association with James and

represent themselves as coming from him

Paul makes Peterrsquos very separation a gospel-issue That is the basis of Paulrsquos condemnation

of Peter Not that eating with Jews or eating according to Jewish food laws is wrong But

that to do so in a context that separates oneself from Gentile believers carries a

communication that they do not have genuine fellowship together

So much so that verse 13 introduces the language of hypocrisy Peterrsquos actions are out of

line with his own beliefs No doubt that if questioned Peterrsquos response would be some kind

of accommodation-line The point here is that in seeking not to offend the Jewish faction

Peter is in fact undermining the gospel message by cutting off the Gentile believers

So Paul confronts Peter in v14 as he observes that there practice does not align with lsquothe

truth of the Gospelrsquo His question highlights Peterrsquos hypocrisy since Peter is a Jew and is

free from the Law and so regularly eats and lives like a Gentile how can he in fact force

Gentiles to live in a Jewish manner This is the outcome of Peterrsquos withdrawal ndash it sends the

message that Gentile believers will need to lsquoJudaisersquo in order to have full insider-status in

the new Christian movement Even though Peter himself makes no move to lsquocompelrsquo the

Gentiles his actions are tantamount to the same

It is unclear when the speech of Paul shifts from historical recollection of conversation with

Peter to epistolary discourse with the Galatians but it is certainly not before v15 The lsquowersquo

of v15 follows (or establishes if you prefer) the distinct referents of we vs you in the letter

We referring at least to Paul and Peter but by implication other Jewish-background

believers is used to distinguish Peter and Paul from lsquoGentile sinnersrsquo Paul asserts this as a

statement of who they are lsquoby naturersquo They were born as Jews and so were not unclean

Gentiles And yet even being such Jews Paul adds the participial phrase of v16 lsquoknowing

that a human being is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christrsquo

Paul here states the key theological principle that drives both his rebuke of Peter and his

argument within Galatians He draws upon Psalm 1432 with a shift from πᾶς ζῶν to πᾶσα

σάρξ but more importantly adds ἐξ ἔργων νόμου The future tense δικαιωθήσεται may

refer to a decisively eschatological justification rather than a generic one This will have

important theological implications

Immediately then we enter into two significant debates The first is concerning the phrase ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου works of the Law For my part I am unpersuaded by the arguments of the NPP

to understand this as something like lsquoJewish boundary markers of ethno-religious identityrsquo

It certainly fails to function that way in Galatians Neither should it be pushed to a generic

lsquolegalismrsquo Rather it expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant context which

appears to be what the Judaising-teachers in Galatia are pushing for

The second is debate over the meaning of lsquorighteousnessrsquo and lsquojustifyrsquo language Again I find

the NPP unpersuasive That a la Wright justification should be redefined in largely

covenant-inclusion terms seems to make a nonsense of justification language at all I stand

with a traditional stream that sees lsquoto justifyrsquo to have legal connotations and to include the

idea of declaring and so performatively making right More on this to come

v16 then expresses Paulrsquos conviction from the scriptures that a human being is not (and

cannot) be right before God through obedience to the Law but can be so justified can be so

right through faith in Jesus Christ (In some instances I suppose one might take lsquofaith of

Jesus Christrsquo to refer to Jesusrsquo faithfulness but I find this position also unconvincing) The

fact that Peter and Paul both know this is why they as Jews trusted in Christ ndash there was

no salvation for them through the (works of the) Law Paul is triply emphatic here he first

declares what lsquowersquo (Jewish believers) know [justification through faith not works of law]

then declares that they believed in Christ so that [justification through faith not works of

law] because [justification through faith not works of law] Peter and Paul are in agreement

that one has to stop lsquodoingrsquo the Law

In v17 Paul raises the question if as believers in Christ and no longer Law-observers we are

lsquosinnersrsquo in that same old covenant sense that Paul raises back in v15 does this in fact make

the Messiah a servant or minister of sin Paulrsquos emphatic μὴ γένοιτο not only rules this out

but is an expression of its absurdity v18 gives the reason lsquoSinnerrsquo in the lsquoGentile sinnerrsquo

sense is an empty term ndash itrsquos been robbed of its meaning by the coming of the new

covenantal reality Rather to go back to the Law to the old covenantal reality would in fact

make Paul a transgressor In re-establishing the Law as a principle for life and obedience

before God the inevitable outcome is sin by the standard of the Law and so condemnation

by the Law Implicit in Paulrsquos argument is that Peterrsquos choice to withdraw from Gentile

company and meals is based on an observance of the Law not only not necessary any more

but in fact a return to it undoes and undermines the Gospel freedom that faith in Christ

brings

The final three verses shift to a very personal note as Paul relates his own salvific existential

reality The Law was the means of Paulrsquos death insofar as he was condemned by the Law

because the Law is a mechanism of death The Law produces neither righteousness nor life

with respect to God It isnrsquot designed to do so And yet Paulrsquos death to Law through Law is

the means for life ndash only through dying to the Law can the Jewish Paul live unto God Paul

immediately links such Law-death to the crucifixion Paulrsquos co-crucifixion with Christ is his

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

16-9

Text 6 Θαυμάζω ὅτι οὕτως ταχέως μετατίθεσθε ἀπὸ τοῦ καλέσαντος ὑμᾶς ἐν χάριτι Χριστοῦ εἰς ἕτερον

εὐαγγέλιον 7 ὃ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλοmiddot εἰ μή τινές εἰσιν οἱ ταράσσοντες ὑμᾶς καὶ θέλοντες μεταστρέψαι τὸ

εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 8 ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐὰν ἡμεῖς ἢ ἄγγελος ἐξ οὐρανοῦ εὐαγγελίζηται ὑμῖν παρʼ ὃ

εὐηγγελισάμεθα ὑμῖν ἀνάθεμα ἔστω 9 ὡς προειρήκαμεν καὶ ἄρτι πάλιν λέγω εἴ τις ὑμᾶς

εὐαγγελίζεται παρʼ ὃ παρελάβετε ἀνάθεμα ἔστω

Translation

16 I am amazed that are deserting so quickly from the one that called you by the grace [of

Christ] to another gospel 7 which is not another [gospel]12 except there are some troubling

you and wishing to pervert the gospel of Christ 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven

preach the gospel [to you] different from what we preached to you let him be anathema39

As we said before4 and now I say again if someone preaches to you different than what you

received let him be anathema

Comments

Unlike most of his letters and letters in general Galatians omits any thanksgiving and

moves directly into astonishment The cause of his astonishment is not the celerity of their

abandonment so much as the desertion itself couple with its speed Theodoret and

Chrysostom both highlight that the desertion is spoken of as not lsquofrom the gospelrsquo but from

God himself to heighten the immensity of their abandonment The mention of lsquocallingrsquo here

again previews significant latter themes in the letter The play in vv6-7 about the gospel

hinges on the fact that in Paulrsquos view another gospel is by definition not a gospel at all

Thus he is forced into speaking of it in one instance as lsquoa different gospelrsquo but then denying

its very gospel-like nature since the message they are turning to is not gospel

v7 also introduces us more directly to the Galatian Opponents They are described here as

lsquothose troublingrsquo the Galatians and lsquowishing to pervert the gospel of Christrsquo Paul has no

hesitation about casting them in the most negative light possible since at stake is the very

gospel message of Paul and thus the eternity of the Galatian believers This leads into the

twice-over warning and anathema lsquoWersquo in v8 should probably be understood as Paul and

his entourage though the primary originator of such preaching is Paul himself It is worth

noting the complement between lsquodifferent from what we preachedrsquo and lsquodifferent from

what you receivedrsquo The language of ἀνάθεμα picks up the OT cultic language of given over

to destruction and so indicates falling under the wrath of God in judgment

1 a different gospel can never be another lsquogospelrsquo that is by definition there is one gospel and so something that was a different gospel could not actually be a gospel 2 re the gospel there is no argument in Galatians about whether Jesus is Lord the question is not one of lsquothe gospel = Jesus is Lordrsquo what is up for grabs is how do you stay or enter into a relationship with God 3 given over to destruction cultic language of 4 does he mean something he said earlier as part of his ministry or is it a reference to verse 8

It is unclear from the text itself whether lsquoas we said beforersquo should be taken to refer to

Pauline teaching in Galatia which he is seeking to remind them of or as a communicative

device referring simply back to v8 and so simply drawing attention to the gravity of Paulrsquos

warning message

Pauls opening gambit highlights the main concern especially of chapters 1-2 that of

defending his gospel against the Opponents who he perceives to be peddling an alternate

and thus deficient and deceptive gospel Pauls defence will come in two parts as he

shows both the independent origin and the lack of difference from the Jerusalem apostles

of his gospel

110-24

Text 10 Ἄρτι γὰρ ἀνθρώπους πείθω ἢ τὸν θεόν ἢ ζητῶ ἀνθρώποις ἀρέσκειν εἰ ἔτι ἀνθρώποις ἤρεσκον

Χριστοῦ δοῦλος οὐκ ἂν ἤμην

11 Γνωρίζω γὰρ ὑμῖν ἀδελφοί τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τὸ εὐαγγελισθὲν ὑπʼ ἐμοῦ ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν κατὰ

ἄνθρωπονmiddot 12 οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐγὼ παρὰ ἀνθρώπου παρέλαβον αὐτό οὔτε ἐδιδάχθην ἀλλὰ διʼ

ἀποκαλύψεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ

13 Ἠκούσατε γὰρ τὴν ἐμὴν ἀναστροφήν ποτε ἐν τῷ Ἰουδαϊσμῷ ὅτι καθʼ ὑπερβολὴν ἐδίωκον τὴν

ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐπόρθουν αὐτήν 14 καὶ προέκοπτον ἐν τῷ Ἰουδαϊσμῷ ὑπὲρ πολλοὺς

συνηλικιώτας ἐν τῷ γένει μου περισσοτέρως ζηλωτὴς ὑπάρχων τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων 15

ὅτε δὲ εὐδόκησεν ὁ ἀφορίσας με ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός μου καὶ καλέσας διὰ τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ 16

ἀποκαλύψαι τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ ἵνα εὐαγγελίζωμαι αὐτὸν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν εὐθέως οὐ

προσανεθέμην σαρκὶ καὶ αἵματι 17 οὐδὲ ἀνῆλθον εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα πρὸς τοὺς πρὸ ἐμοῦ ἀποστόλους

ἀλλὰ ἀπῆλθον εἰς Ἀραβίαν καὶ πάλιν ὑπέστρεψα εἰς Δαμασκόν

18 Ἔπειτα μετὰ ἔτη τρία ἀνῆλθον εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ἱστορῆσαι Κηφᾶν καὶ ἐπέμεινα πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡμέρας

δεκαπέντεmiddot 19 ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου 20 ἃ δὲ

γράφω ὑμῖν ἰδοὺ ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ ὅτι οὐ ψεύδομαι 21 ἔπειτα ἦλθον εἰς τὰ κλίματα τῆς Συρίας καὶ

τῆς Κιλικίας 22 ἤμην δὲ ἀγνοούμενος τῷ προσώπῳ ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς Ἰουδαίας ταῖς ἐν Χριστῷ 23

μόνον δὲ ἀκούοντες ἦσαν ὅτι Ὁ διώκων ἡμᾶς ποτε νῦν εὐαγγελίζεται τὴν πίστιν ἥν ποτε ἐπόρθει 24

καὶ ἐδόξαζον ἐν ἐμοὶ τὸν θεόν

Textual Criticism

v11 γάρ vs δέ Almost balanced textual support One suspects the meaning is not overly

affected by the variation

v15 εὐδόκησεν + [ὁ Θεός] The addition has numerous textual witnesses but important

texts omit it It probably should be omitted since its insertion is explicable by a desire to

bring out the implied subject of εὐδόκησεν Its omission conversely would be difficult to

explain

v18 Κηφᾶν is supported by strong textual witnesses while Πέτρον is almost certainly a later

substitution of the more familiar Greek name for the apostle Such a variation occurs several

later times in the epistle which I will simply note without comment

Translation

10 For do I now persuade men or God or do I seek to please men For if I still were

pleasing men I would not be a slave of Christ 11 For I make known to you brothers the

gospel proclaimed by me that it is not merely human in nature 12 For neither did I receive

it from men nor was taught it but through a revelation of Jesus Christ 13 For you heard my

way of life formerly in Judaism that I persecuted the church of God in an extreme manner

and attempted to destroy it 14 and was advancing in Judaism beyond many of the cohort of

my generation being an extreme zealot for my ancestral traditions 15 But when [God]

having set me apart from my motherrsquos womb and calling me through his grace 16 revealed

his son in me so that I might preach him among the nations [Gentiles] I did not

immediately consult with flesh and blood 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those apostles

that precede me but I departed into Arabia and returned again to Damascus 18 Then after

three years I went up to Jerusalem to pay an inquiring visit to Kephas and I stayed with him

fifteen days 19 but another of the apostles I did not see except Jacob the brother of the

Lord 20 which things I write to you see Before God I am not lying 21 Then I went into the

regions of Syria and Cilicia 22 I was unknown by face to the churches of Judaea that are in

Christ 23 They only were hearing that the one formerly persecuting them now preached the

Faith which formerly he sought to destroy 24 and they glorified God because of me

Comments

Although some read πείθω and ἀρέσκειν as having virtually the same force I think it better

to give each an independent force So Paul raises the question about (a) persuading and (b)

pleasing and implies a dichotomy between the two Is the object of his persuasive efforts

God or men The second clause of 10 lsquoor do I seek to please menrsquo along with the answer in

10c resolves the rhetorical questions Paul isnrsquot making a rhetorical defence before God

since he has no need to persuade God nor purpose in doing so but rather seeks to please

God On the other hand his persuasive attempts are directed towards human beings which

is why he doesnrsquot seek to please human beings In 10c Paul suggests that service (slavery) to

Christ necessarily rules out pleasing men This verse sets up the tone of the rest of the

passage which will launch into Paulrsquos defence of his gospel and apostleship

v11 then functions as a Topic sentence about the nature and origin of Paulrsquos gospel It is not

κατὰ ἄνθρωπον lsquoaccording to menrsquo which should probably be understood as lsquobeing human

in nature and characteristicsrsquo The reason for its non-human character is v12 its non human

origins ndash neither received (the passing on of tradition) from a human being nor taught it

but by a direct supernatural revelation whose agent and source if Jesus Christ

Paulrsquos backing (γὰρ) for the radical nature of this revelation is point to his former way of life

lsquoin Judaismrsquo However we want to read the parting of the ways Paul is prepared to see his

former life as part of a distinct religious identity of lsquoJudaismrsquo There is real irony that to

lsquoadvance in Judaismrsquo was to lsquopersecute τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ a phrase which has the

Jewish identity of lsquoIsraelrsquo but which Paul now situates as lsquoGodrsquos assemblyrsquo To advance in

Judaism was to persecute the Israel of God (cf 616) Though I would be reluctant to assert

any literary or direct connection the zeal for τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων matches well

with Jesusrsquo own engagement with the Pharisaical schools as in Mark 71-23

The construction of v15 is odd partly because the flow of thought introduced by lsquobut when

God was pleasedrsquo is interrupted by an extended description of God in terms of Paulrsquos

setting-apart from the womb and calling The phrase is drawn from Isaiah 491 with further

correspondence to Jeremiah 15 and situates Paulrsquos calling in terms of the Old Testament

prophets What other category for calling would Paul have drawn upon For this reason I

cannot sanction interpretations that want to deny a conversion experience to Paul in place

of a lsquocallingrsquo experience Paulrsquos radical thennow JudaismChrist constructions rules out a

purely intra-Judaism development

The nature of Paulrsquos calling is specified in v16 to preach the gospel to the nations Nations

here should be understood in its typical sense lsquoGentilesrsquo hence my inclusion in brackets

Thus Paulrsquos calling and conversion to some extent coincide Whether v16 ἐν ἐμοί is to be

taken as lsquoin mersquo as the location of the revelation or else instrumentally lsquoby mersquo to Paulrsquos

ongoing revelation of the Christ through his preaching is open to debate Though Paulrsquos

ongoing preaching is logically dependent upon the revelation of the Christ to him

Paul now emphasises the autonomy of his initial period He did not lsquoconsult with flesh and

bloodrsquo ndash reinforcing his earlier comment in v12 about the non-human origin and teaching of

his gospel v17 likewise disassociates his gospel activity from the Jerusalem-apostles Rather

Paul went to Arabia (ie the Nabataean kingdom) and specifically Damascus

The three year gap before Paul visits Jerusalem gives his gospel and apostleship a lsquodistancersquo

from the Jerusalem apostles which serves as Paulrsquos defence of its independence He does

not deny dealing with the Jerusalem apostles but is keen to delineate his autobiography in

terms that demonstrate that independence So v18 he mentions his visit to Kephas (Peter)

which lasted 15 days and involved no other major Jerusalem identities beyond Jacob

(James) the brother of Jesus v20 is a meta-comment upon the narrative itself ndash Paul draws

attention to his self-disclosure and attests to his truthfulness v21-24 summarise events

beyond that initial visit ndash his return into Syria and Cilicia the fact that he was not acquainted

in person with Judean churches and they praised God

We might also note that Paulrsquos visit to Jerusalem here is informal There is not delegation

no officiality just Paul coming to Jerusalem and meeting two Christian leaders He is again

emphasising that he didnrsquot lsquogetrsquo his gospel on this occasion Indeed cross-checking with Acts

reveals his prior gospel ministry Secondly lsquothe Faithrsquo in v23 is a remarkably Christian

expression since Christianity as a religion is built upon lsquoFaithrsquo To speak of other religious

traditions as lsquofaithsrsquo is to import a key Christian distinctive into them that is not necessarily

present So Paul can speak of preaching the Faith in a unique sense of the word This

section 111-24 repeatedly hammers the defence of the source of Paulrsquos gospel and Paulrsquos

apostleship

21-10

Text 21 Ἔπειτα διὰ δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν πάλιν ἀνέβην εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα μετὰ Βαρναβᾶ συμπαραλαβὼν καὶ

Τίτονmiddot 2 ἀνέβην δὲ κατὰ ἀποκάλυψινmiddot καὶ ἀνεθέμην αὐτοῖς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ κηρύσσω ἐν τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν κατʼ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς δοκοῦσιν μή πως εἰς κενὸν τρέχω ἢ ἔδραμον 3 ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ Τίτος ὁ σὺν

ἐμοί Ἕλλην ὤν ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναιmiddot 4 διὰ δὲ τοὺς παρεισάκτους ψευδαδέλφους οἵτινες

παρεισῆλθον κατασκοπῆσαι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ἡμῶν ἣν ἔχομεν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα ἡμᾶς

καταδουλώσουσινmdash 5 οἷς οὐδὲ πρὸς ὥραν εἴξαμεν τῇ ὑποταγῇ ἵνα ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίου

διαμείνῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς 6 ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τιmdash ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι διαφέρειmiddot

πρόσωπον θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνειmdash ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο 7 ἀλλὰ

τοὐναντίον ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς 8

ὁ γὰρ ἐνεργήσας Πέτρῳ εἰς ἀποστολὴν τῆς περιτομῆς ἐνήργησεν καὶ ἐμοὶ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη 9 καὶ γνόντες

τὴν χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι Ἰάκωβος καὶ Κηφᾶς καὶ Ἰωάννης οἱ δοκοῦντες στῦλοι εἶναι δεξιὰς

ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρναβᾷ κοινωνίας ἵνα ἡμεῖς εἰς τὰ ἔθνη αὐτοὶ δὲ εἰς τὴν περιτομήνmiddot 10 μόνον τῶν

πτωχῶν ἵνα μνημονεύωμεν ὃ καὶ ἐσπούδασα αὐτὸ τοῦτο ποιῆσαι5

Textual Criticism

πάλιν ἀνέβην in v1 has both early and diverse attestation The reverse order is supported by

mainly Western texts In any case the significance would be virtually zero

In v5 several texts omit οἷς which grammatically smooths the text omission of οὐδέ on the

other hand might harmonise Paulrsquos yielding with Act 163 (so Metzger conjectures) but

would run directly contrary to Paulrsquos Galatian argument

v9 the reading of the names is altered in some texts with the more familiar Πέτρος

substituted for Κηφᾶς and brought to the front for prominence

Translation

1 Then after 14 years I again went up to Jerusalem taking with me Barnabas and Titus 2 I

went up in accordance with a revelation and I presented to them the gospel which I preach

among the nations privately to those that seemed good lest somehow I am running or

have run in vain 3 but not even Titus who was with me being a Greek was compelled to be

circumcised 4 now on account of the snuck-in pseudo-brothers who snuck in to spy out our

liberty which we have in Christ Jesus that they might enslave us 5 to whom not even for an

hour did we yield to subjugation so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you

6 But from those that seemed to be something ndash whatever they were formerly matters

nothing to me (God does not judge men at face-value) ndash for those who seemed to be

5 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 2

regarded added nothing to me 7 but rather seeing that I have been entrusted with the

gospel of the uncircumcision just as Peter of the uncircumcision 8 for the One operating

through Peter for the apostolate of the uncircumcised worked also through me to the

nations 9 and knowing the grace that was given to me Jacob and Kephas and John those

seeming to be pillars gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship so that we unto

the nations and they unto the circumcision 10 only that we should remember the poor6

which this very thing I was eager to do

Comments

The temporal sequencing of Paulrsquos autobiographical material continues with the initial

Ἔπειτα The 14 year gap between Paulrsquos first initial visit and this second visit again confirms

Paulrsquos autonomous gospel ministry Commentators divide over whether this visit accords

with Acts 15 Acts 11 or another occasion altogether Given that the council in Acts 15

provides a clear statement of Gentile law-observance it seems odd that Paul would not cite

nor bring that letter to bear on the Galatian scenario if this visit coincided with the Acts 15

narrative For this reason I am inclined to see this visit as either corresponding to the Acts 11

visit or another unspecified visit to Jerusalem

Paul cites three different reasons for his visit to Jerusalem on this occasion Firstly it is in

accordance with a revelation Paul does not identify whether this revelation in particular

was given to him directly In any case it grounds Paulrsquos movements in Godrsquos activity and

purpose Secondly he presents to lsquothemrsquo his gospel in conjunction with the third reason to

ensure his gospel work wasnrsquot in vain

Understandably it can seem that Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel to the Jerusalem leaders

is to gain their approval but broader considerations render this unlikely Paul has been

arguing for the God-revealed autonomous nature of his gospel He doesnrsquot personally need

the Jerusalem leadersrsquo approval or blessing No rather Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel is to

confirm the unity of his gospel with the Jerusalem leaders the Jewish-apostolate and so to

reject claims that Paulrsquos gospel work was half-done which left open a path for his Judaising

opponents to sneak in and lsquocompletersquo Paulrsquos gospel work

At this point attention to pronouns becomes more necessary I think a good case can be

maintained that the language of lsquowersquo throughout most of Galatians refers to Jewish-

background believers in Christ while lsquoyoursquo has in view Gentile-background believers ie the

Galatians So Paul notes that Titus though a Greek was not compelled to be circumcised

The Jerusalem church did not require entrance and observance of Torah from a Gentile-

believer

The grammar of 4-6 is somewhat discontinuous All of verse 4 prepares for verse 5 so that

Paulrsquos refusal to yield is the main concept The false-brothers of verse 4 are the Jerusalem

6 Who are the poor The marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the poor in general which is an expression of Christian faith

counterparts to the opponents in Galatia ndash Judaising believers who seek Torah-observance

The lsquoour libertyrsquo in v4 refers to the very liberty that even Jewish-background believers in

Christ have a freedom from the Law which Paul will elaborate latter in the epistle Yet

Paulrsquos defence of his liberty has the Gentiles in view ndash v5 Gentile freedom from Law-

observance depends upon Jewish freedom from the same

In verse 6 Paul notes that the Jerusalem leaders added nothing additional to his gospel This

matches his purpose in coming to Jerusalem ndash to attest to the agreement in gospel

proclamation between his gospel and their gospel so that the unity of the gospel might be

established not so that Paulrsquos gospel might be approved Thus Paul defends both the

autonomy of his gospel and its congruity with the other apostlesrsquo message

Paulrsquos repeated disavowal of respect for status in these verses also deserves some

comment The δοκεῖν language should not be treated as suggesting insincerity as if Paul

were saying lsquothose who seemed to be something (but arenrsquot)rsquo This is an English connotation

to the language of lsquoseemingrsquo that does not apply in the Greek Paulrsquos point is probably rather

that being unacquainted with the Jerusalem church these were those who did indeed

appear to him to be important and proven leaders Yet he also makes the point that

lsquowhatever they were formerly matters nothing to mersquo The presence of the word ποτε

suggests that Paulrsquos disconcern for their status has more to do with their former way of life

indeed all our former ways of life than present reality His aside that πρόσωπον [ὁ] θεὸς

ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει draws from Dt 1017 with some minor alterations The concept is

prominent elsewhere in James in referring to Godrsquos impartiality

Verses 7-8 then concentrate on the difference between Paul and the Jerusalem leaders The

expressions τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας and τῆς περιτομῆς should be understood as the

receivers of that gospel proclamation so that Paulrsquos apostolate extends to the Gentiles

whereas Peterrsquos focuses on the Jews This division of mission fields is confirmed in v9 with

the right hand of fellowship given to Paul and Barnabas for their Gentile-mission work The

final comment of v10 may sound like an addition to Paulrsquos teachings but Paul emphasises

that it is already his own concern There is some debate about who lsquothe poorrsquo are whether

the marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the

poor in general as an expression of Christian faith In light of the ethical dimensions of later

Galatians I would suggest that it is the economically poor within the Christian community

and in light of the historical factors particularly those suffering in connection with the

Jerusalem church

211-21

Text 11 Ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν Κηφᾶς εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ ἀντέστην ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦνmiddot 12 πρὸ

τοῦ γὰρ ἐλθεῖν τινας ἀπὸ Ἰακώβου μετὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν συνήσθιενmiddot ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον ὑπέστελλεν καὶ

ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτόν φοβούμενος τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς 13 καὶ συνυπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ

Ἰουδαῖοι ὥστε καὶ Βαρναβᾶς συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει 14 ἀλλʼ ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ

ὀρθοποδοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ ἔμπροσθεν πάντωνmiddot Εἰ σὺ

Ἰουδαῖος ὑπάρχων ἐθνικῶς καὶ οὐκ Ἰουδαϊκῶς ζῇς πῶς τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις Ἰουδαΐζειν 15 Ἡμεῖς

φύσει Ἰουδαῖοι καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἐθνῶν ἁμαρτωλοί 16 εἰδότες δὲ ὅτι οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν ἵνα

δικαιωθῶμεν ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται

πᾶσα σάρξ 17 εἰ δὲ ζητοῦντες δικαιωθῆναι ἐν Χριστῷ εὑρέθημεν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἁμαρτωλοί ἆρα Χριστὸς

ἁμαρτίας διάκονος μὴ γένοιτοmiddot 18 εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομῶ παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν

συνιστάνω 19 ἐγὼ γὰρ διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον ἵνα θεῷ ζήσωmiddot Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαιmiddot 20 ζῶ δὲ

οὐκέτι ἐγώ ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστόςmiddot ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ

ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ 21 οὐκ ἀθετῶ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦmiddot εἰ γὰρ διὰ

νόμου δικαιοσύνη ἄρα Χριστὸς δωρεὰν ἀπέθανεν

Textual Criticism

12 τινας τινα ndash the manuscript support for the former is strong and diverse and the former

reading is more logical in the context

12 ἦλθον ἦλθεν ndash the manuscript support is slightly more even on this variation but the

former reading is preferable matching the τινας of the preceding

Translation

11 But when Kephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face because he was

condemned 12 for before the coming of certain men from Jacob he ate together with the

Gentiles but when they came he drew back and separated himself fearing those of the

Circumcision 13 and the remaining Jews joined him in hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was

led astray by their hypocrisy 14 But when I saw that they were not dealing straight in line

with the truth of the gospel I said to Kephas before all ldquoIf you being a Jew do not live in a

Jewish manner why do you compel the nations to Judaise 15 We by nature are Jews and

not sinners of the Nations 16 but knowing that a human being is not justified by the works

of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ even we believed in Christ Jesus so that we

might be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law because by the works of the

law all flesh will not be justified 17 But if we are found to be seeking to be justified in Christ

and are ourselves sinners then is Christ a servant of sin Not so 18 For I through the law

died to the law so that I might live to God I have been co-crucified with Christ 20 and I no

longer live but Christ lives in me what I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God

that loved me and gave himself on my behalf 21 I do not nullify the grace of God for if

through the law came righteousness then Christ died vainly

Comments

In verse 11 we have both the continuations of Paulrsquos temporally marked biographical

defence but also the introduction of a new sequence Peter comes to Antioch and there is

a division between Peter and Paul which Paul goes on to relate Paul gives the reason for his

strong opposition ndash Peter lsquowas condemnedrsquo This may be understood as lsquoPeter stood

condemnedrsquo by his actions Paul then explains the basis for Peterrsquos condemnation in verse

12 His former practice was to share table-fellowship to eat with the Gentile believes (with

lsquothe nationsrsquo) an action that Paul understands as being in line with the Gospel message

And indeed Peter does too based upon Acts at least Yet a new party comes to Antioch

lsquocertain men from Jacob (James)rsquo While Peter and James certainly represent a Christianity

more deeply embedded in Jewish cultural practices it is a mistake to overread this diversity

Debate continues about how we should understand the relationship between these men

and James himself Are they authorised Do they represent James and Jamesrsquo position Acts

15 suggests not On this basis I am inclined to see the party as a group associated with

Jamesrsquo more Jewish Christian practice but more conservative than James himself and not

an authorised delegation by any means They have some association with James and

represent themselves as coming from him

Paul makes Peterrsquos very separation a gospel-issue That is the basis of Paulrsquos condemnation

of Peter Not that eating with Jews or eating according to Jewish food laws is wrong But

that to do so in a context that separates oneself from Gentile believers carries a

communication that they do not have genuine fellowship together

So much so that verse 13 introduces the language of hypocrisy Peterrsquos actions are out of

line with his own beliefs No doubt that if questioned Peterrsquos response would be some kind

of accommodation-line The point here is that in seeking not to offend the Jewish faction

Peter is in fact undermining the gospel message by cutting off the Gentile believers

So Paul confronts Peter in v14 as he observes that there practice does not align with lsquothe

truth of the Gospelrsquo His question highlights Peterrsquos hypocrisy since Peter is a Jew and is

free from the Law and so regularly eats and lives like a Gentile how can he in fact force

Gentiles to live in a Jewish manner This is the outcome of Peterrsquos withdrawal ndash it sends the

message that Gentile believers will need to lsquoJudaisersquo in order to have full insider-status in

the new Christian movement Even though Peter himself makes no move to lsquocompelrsquo the

Gentiles his actions are tantamount to the same

It is unclear when the speech of Paul shifts from historical recollection of conversation with

Peter to epistolary discourse with the Galatians but it is certainly not before v15 The lsquowersquo

of v15 follows (or establishes if you prefer) the distinct referents of we vs you in the letter

We referring at least to Paul and Peter but by implication other Jewish-background

believers is used to distinguish Peter and Paul from lsquoGentile sinnersrsquo Paul asserts this as a

statement of who they are lsquoby naturersquo They were born as Jews and so were not unclean

Gentiles And yet even being such Jews Paul adds the participial phrase of v16 lsquoknowing

that a human being is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christrsquo

Paul here states the key theological principle that drives both his rebuke of Peter and his

argument within Galatians He draws upon Psalm 1432 with a shift from πᾶς ζῶν to πᾶσα

σάρξ but more importantly adds ἐξ ἔργων νόμου The future tense δικαιωθήσεται may

refer to a decisively eschatological justification rather than a generic one This will have

important theological implications

Immediately then we enter into two significant debates The first is concerning the phrase ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου works of the Law For my part I am unpersuaded by the arguments of the NPP

to understand this as something like lsquoJewish boundary markers of ethno-religious identityrsquo

It certainly fails to function that way in Galatians Neither should it be pushed to a generic

lsquolegalismrsquo Rather it expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant context which

appears to be what the Judaising-teachers in Galatia are pushing for

The second is debate over the meaning of lsquorighteousnessrsquo and lsquojustifyrsquo language Again I find

the NPP unpersuasive That a la Wright justification should be redefined in largely

covenant-inclusion terms seems to make a nonsense of justification language at all I stand

with a traditional stream that sees lsquoto justifyrsquo to have legal connotations and to include the

idea of declaring and so performatively making right More on this to come

v16 then expresses Paulrsquos conviction from the scriptures that a human being is not (and

cannot) be right before God through obedience to the Law but can be so justified can be so

right through faith in Jesus Christ (In some instances I suppose one might take lsquofaith of

Jesus Christrsquo to refer to Jesusrsquo faithfulness but I find this position also unconvincing) The

fact that Peter and Paul both know this is why they as Jews trusted in Christ ndash there was

no salvation for them through the (works of the) Law Paul is triply emphatic here he first

declares what lsquowersquo (Jewish believers) know [justification through faith not works of law]

then declares that they believed in Christ so that [justification through faith not works of

law] because [justification through faith not works of law] Peter and Paul are in agreement

that one has to stop lsquodoingrsquo the Law

In v17 Paul raises the question if as believers in Christ and no longer Law-observers we are

lsquosinnersrsquo in that same old covenant sense that Paul raises back in v15 does this in fact make

the Messiah a servant or minister of sin Paulrsquos emphatic μὴ γένοιτο not only rules this out

but is an expression of its absurdity v18 gives the reason lsquoSinnerrsquo in the lsquoGentile sinnerrsquo

sense is an empty term ndash itrsquos been robbed of its meaning by the coming of the new

covenantal reality Rather to go back to the Law to the old covenantal reality would in fact

make Paul a transgressor In re-establishing the Law as a principle for life and obedience

before God the inevitable outcome is sin by the standard of the Law and so condemnation

by the Law Implicit in Paulrsquos argument is that Peterrsquos choice to withdraw from Gentile

company and meals is based on an observance of the Law not only not necessary any more

but in fact a return to it undoes and undermines the Gospel freedom that faith in Christ

brings

The final three verses shift to a very personal note as Paul relates his own salvific existential

reality The Law was the means of Paulrsquos death insofar as he was condemned by the Law

because the Law is a mechanism of death The Law produces neither righteousness nor life

with respect to God It isnrsquot designed to do so And yet Paulrsquos death to Law through Law is

the means for life ndash only through dying to the Law can the Jewish Paul live unto God Paul

immediately links such Law-death to the crucifixion Paulrsquos co-crucifixion with Christ is his

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

It is unclear from the text itself whether lsquoas we said beforersquo should be taken to refer to

Pauline teaching in Galatia which he is seeking to remind them of or as a communicative

device referring simply back to v8 and so simply drawing attention to the gravity of Paulrsquos

warning message

Pauls opening gambit highlights the main concern especially of chapters 1-2 that of

defending his gospel against the Opponents who he perceives to be peddling an alternate

and thus deficient and deceptive gospel Pauls defence will come in two parts as he

shows both the independent origin and the lack of difference from the Jerusalem apostles

of his gospel

110-24

Text 10 Ἄρτι γὰρ ἀνθρώπους πείθω ἢ τὸν θεόν ἢ ζητῶ ἀνθρώποις ἀρέσκειν εἰ ἔτι ἀνθρώποις ἤρεσκον

Χριστοῦ δοῦλος οὐκ ἂν ἤμην

11 Γνωρίζω γὰρ ὑμῖν ἀδελφοί τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τὸ εὐαγγελισθὲν ὑπʼ ἐμοῦ ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν κατὰ

ἄνθρωπονmiddot 12 οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐγὼ παρὰ ἀνθρώπου παρέλαβον αὐτό οὔτε ἐδιδάχθην ἀλλὰ διʼ

ἀποκαλύψεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ

13 Ἠκούσατε γὰρ τὴν ἐμὴν ἀναστροφήν ποτε ἐν τῷ Ἰουδαϊσμῷ ὅτι καθʼ ὑπερβολὴν ἐδίωκον τὴν

ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐπόρθουν αὐτήν 14 καὶ προέκοπτον ἐν τῷ Ἰουδαϊσμῷ ὑπὲρ πολλοὺς

συνηλικιώτας ἐν τῷ γένει μου περισσοτέρως ζηλωτὴς ὑπάρχων τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων 15

ὅτε δὲ εὐδόκησεν ὁ ἀφορίσας με ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός μου καὶ καλέσας διὰ τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ 16

ἀποκαλύψαι τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ ἵνα εὐαγγελίζωμαι αὐτὸν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν εὐθέως οὐ

προσανεθέμην σαρκὶ καὶ αἵματι 17 οὐδὲ ἀνῆλθον εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα πρὸς τοὺς πρὸ ἐμοῦ ἀποστόλους

ἀλλὰ ἀπῆλθον εἰς Ἀραβίαν καὶ πάλιν ὑπέστρεψα εἰς Δαμασκόν

18 Ἔπειτα μετὰ ἔτη τρία ἀνῆλθον εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ἱστορῆσαι Κηφᾶν καὶ ἐπέμεινα πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡμέρας

δεκαπέντεmiddot 19 ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου 20 ἃ δὲ

γράφω ὑμῖν ἰδοὺ ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ ὅτι οὐ ψεύδομαι 21 ἔπειτα ἦλθον εἰς τὰ κλίματα τῆς Συρίας καὶ

τῆς Κιλικίας 22 ἤμην δὲ ἀγνοούμενος τῷ προσώπῳ ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς Ἰουδαίας ταῖς ἐν Χριστῷ 23

μόνον δὲ ἀκούοντες ἦσαν ὅτι Ὁ διώκων ἡμᾶς ποτε νῦν εὐαγγελίζεται τὴν πίστιν ἥν ποτε ἐπόρθει 24

καὶ ἐδόξαζον ἐν ἐμοὶ τὸν θεόν

Textual Criticism

v11 γάρ vs δέ Almost balanced textual support One suspects the meaning is not overly

affected by the variation

v15 εὐδόκησεν + [ὁ Θεός] The addition has numerous textual witnesses but important

texts omit it It probably should be omitted since its insertion is explicable by a desire to

bring out the implied subject of εὐδόκησεν Its omission conversely would be difficult to

explain

v18 Κηφᾶν is supported by strong textual witnesses while Πέτρον is almost certainly a later

substitution of the more familiar Greek name for the apostle Such a variation occurs several

later times in the epistle which I will simply note without comment

Translation

10 For do I now persuade men or God or do I seek to please men For if I still were

pleasing men I would not be a slave of Christ 11 For I make known to you brothers the

gospel proclaimed by me that it is not merely human in nature 12 For neither did I receive

it from men nor was taught it but through a revelation of Jesus Christ 13 For you heard my

way of life formerly in Judaism that I persecuted the church of God in an extreme manner

and attempted to destroy it 14 and was advancing in Judaism beyond many of the cohort of

my generation being an extreme zealot for my ancestral traditions 15 But when [God]

having set me apart from my motherrsquos womb and calling me through his grace 16 revealed

his son in me so that I might preach him among the nations [Gentiles] I did not

immediately consult with flesh and blood 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those apostles

that precede me but I departed into Arabia and returned again to Damascus 18 Then after

three years I went up to Jerusalem to pay an inquiring visit to Kephas and I stayed with him

fifteen days 19 but another of the apostles I did not see except Jacob the brother of the

Lord 20 which things I write to you see Before God I am not lying 21 Then I went into the

regions of Syria and Cilicia 22 I was unknown by face to the churches of Judaea that are in

Christ 23 They only were hearing that the one formerly persecuting them now preached the

Faith which formerly he sought to destroy 24 and they glorified God because of me

Comments

Although some read πείθω and ἀρέσκειν as having virtually the same force I think it better

to give each an independent force So Paul raises the question about (a) persuading and (b)

pleasing and implies a dichotomy between the two Is the object of his persuasive efforts

God or men The second clause of 10 lsquoor do I seek to please menrsquo along with the answer in

10c resolves the rhetorical questions Paul isnrsquot making a rhetorical defence before God

since he has no need to persuade God nor purpose in doing so but rather seeks to please

God On the other hand his persuasive attempts are directed towards human beings which

is why he doesnrsquot seek to please human beings In 10c Paul suggests that service (slavery) to

Christ necessarily rules out pleasing men This verse sets up the tone of the rest of the

passage which will launch into Paulrsquos defence of his gospel and apostleship

v11 then functions as a Topic sentence about the nature and origin of Paulrsquos gospel It is not

κατὰ ἄνθρωπον lsquoaccording to menrsquo which should probably be understood as lsquobeing human

in nature and characteristicsrsquo The reason for its non-human character is v12 its non human

origins ndash neither received (the passing on of tradition) from a human being nor taught it

but by a direct supernatural revelation whose agent and source if Jesus Christ

Paulrsquos backing (γὰρ) for the radical nature of this revelation is point to his former way of life

lsquoin Judaismrsquo However we want to read the parting of the ways Paul is prepared to see his

former life as part of a distinct religious identity of lsquoJudaismrsquo There is real irony that to

lsquoadvance in Judaismrsquo was to lsquopersecute τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ a phrase which has the

Jewish identity of lsquoIsraelrsquo but which Paul now situates as lsquoGodrsquos assemblyrsquo To advance in

Judaism was to persecute the Israel of God (cf 616) Though I would be reluctant to assert

any literary or direct connection the zeal for τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων matches well

with Jesusrsquo own engagement with the Pharisaical schools as in Mark 71-23

The construction of v15 is odd partly because the flow of thought introduced by lsquobut when

God was pleasedrsquo is interrupted by an extended description of God in terms of Paulrsquos

setting-apart from the womb and calling The phrase is drawn from Isaiah 491 with further

correspondence to Jeremiah 15 and situates Paulrsquos calling in terms of the Old Testament

prophets What other category for calling would Paul have drawn upon For this reason I

cannot sanction interpretations that want to deny a conversion experience to Paul in place

of a lsquocallingrsquo experience Paulrsquos radical thennow JudaismChrist constructions rules out a

purely intra-Judaism development

The nature of Paulrsquos calling is specified in v16 to preach the gospel to the nations Nations

here should be understood in its typical sense lsquoGentilesrsquo hence my inclusion in brackets

Thus Paulrsquos calling and conversion to some extent coincide Whether v16 ἐν ἐμοί is to be

taken as lsquoin mersquo as the location of the revelation or else instrumentally lsquoby mersquo to Paulrsquos

ongoing revelation of the Christ through his preaching is open to debate Though Paulrsquos

ongoing preaching is logically dependent upon the revelation of the Christ to him

Paul now emphasises the autonomy of his initial period He did not lsquoconsult with flesh and

bloodrsquo ndash reinforcing his earlier comment in v12 about the non-human origin and teaching of

his gospel v17 likewise disassociates his gospel activity from the Jerusalem-apostles Rather

Paul went to Arabia (ie the Nabataean kingdom) and specifically Damascus

The three year gap before Paul visits Jerusalem gives his gospel and apostleship a lsquodistancersquo

from the Jerusalem apostles which serves as Paulrsquos defence of its independence He does

not deny dealing with the Jerusalem apostles but is keen to delineate his autobiography in

terms that demonstrate that independence So v18 he mentions his visit to Kephas (Peter)

which lasted 15 days and involved no other major Jerusalem identities beyond Jacob

(James) the brother of Jesus v20 is a meta-comment upon the narrative itself ndash Paul draws

attention to his self-disclosure and attests to his truthfulness v21-24 summarise events

beyond that initial visit ndash his return into Syria and Cilicia the fact that he was not acquainted

in person with Judean churches and they praised God

We might also note that Paulrsquos visit to Jerusalem here is informal There is not delegation

no officiality just Paul coming to Jerusalem and meeting two Christian leaders He is again

emphasising that he didnrsquot lsquogetrsquo his gospel on this occasion Indeed cross-checking with Acts

reveals his prior gospel ministry Secondly lsquothe Faithrsquo in v23 is a remarkably Christian

expression since Christianity as a religion is built upon lsquoFaithrsquo To speak of other religious

traditions as lsquofaithsrsquo is to import a key Christian distinctive into them that is not necessarily

present So Paul can speak of preaching the Faith in a unique sense of the word This

section 111-24 repeatedly hammers the defence of the source of Paulrsquos gospel and Paulrsquos

apostleship

21-10

Text 21 Ἔπειτα διὰ δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν πάλιν ἀνέβην εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα μετὰ Βαρναβᾶ συμπαραλαβὼν καὶ

Τίτονmiddot 2 ἀνέβην δὲ κατὰ ἀποκάλυψινmiddot καὶ ἀνεθέμην αὐτοῖς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ κηρύσσω ἐν τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν κατʼ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς δοκοῦσιν μή πως εἰς κενὸν τρέχω ἢ ἔδραμον 3 ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ Τίτος ὁ σὺν

ἐμοί Ἕλλην ὤν ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναιmiddot 4 διὰ δὲ τοὺς παρεισάκτους ψευδαδέλφους οἵτινες

παρεισῆλθον κατασκοπῆσαι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ἡμῶν ἣν ἔχομεν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα ἡμᾶς

καταδουλώσουσινmdash 5 οἷς οὐδὲ πρὸς ὥραν εἴξαμεν τῇ ὑποταγῇ ἵνα ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίου

διαμείνῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς 6 ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τιmdash ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι διαφέρειmiddot

πρόσωπον θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνειmdash ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο 7 ἀλλὰ

τοὐναντίον ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς 8

ὁ γὰρ ἐνεργήσας Πέτρῳ εἰς ἀποστολὴν τῆς περιτομῆς ἐνήργησεν καὶ ἐμοὶ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη 9 καὶ γνόντες

τὴν χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι Ἰάκωβος καὶ Κηφᾶς καὶ Ἰωάννης οἱ δοκοῦντες στῦλοι εἶναι δεξιὰς

ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρναβᾷ κοινωνίας ἵνα ἡμεῖς εἰς τὰ ἔθνη αὐτοὶ δὲ εἰς τὴν περιτομήνmiddot 10 μόνον τῶν

πτωχῶν ἵνα μνημονεύωμεν ὃ καὶ ἐσπούδασα αὐτὸ τοῦτο ποιῆσαι5

Textual Criticism

πάλιν ἀνέβην in v1 has both early and diverse attestation The reverse order is supported by

mainly Western texts In any case the significance would be virtually zero

In v5 several texts omit οἷς which grammatically smooths the text omission of οὐδέ on the

other hand might harmonise Paulrsquos yielding with Act 163 (so Metzger conjectures) but

would run directly contrary to Paulrsquos Galatian argument

v9 the reading of the names is altered in some texts with the more familiar Πέτρος

substituted for Κηφᾶς and brought to the front for prominence

Translation

1 Then after 14 years I again went up to Jerusalem taking with me Barnabas and Titus 2 I

went up in accordance with a revelation and I presented to them the gospel which I preach

among the nations privately to those that seemed good lest somehow I am running or

have run in vain 3 but not even Titus who was with me being a Greek was compelled to be

circumcised 4 now on account of the snuck-in pseudo-brothers who snuck in to spy out our

liberty which we have in Christ Jesus that they might enslave us 5 to whom not even for an

hour did we yield to subjugation so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you

6 But from those that seemed to be something ndash whatever they were formerly matters

nothing to me (God does not judge men at face-value) ndash for those who seemed to be

5 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 2

regarded added nothing to me 7 but rather seeing that I have been entrusted with the

gospel of the uncircumcision just as Peter of the uncircumcision 8 for the One operating

through Peter for the apostolate of the uncircumcised worked also through me to the

nations 9 and knowing the grace that was given to me Jacob and Kephas and John those

seeming to be pillars gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship so that we unto

the nations and they unto the circumcision 10 only that we should remember the poor6

which this very thing I was eager to do

Comments

The temporal sequencing of Paulrsquos autobiographical material continues with the initial

Ἔπειτα The 14 year gap between Paulrsquos first initial visit and this second visit again confirms

Paulrsquos autonomous gospel ministry Commentators divide over whether this visit accords

with Acts 15 Acts 11 or another occasion altogether Given that the council in Acts 15

provides a clear statement of Gentile law-observance it seems odd that Paul would not cite

nor bring that letter to bear on the Galatian scenario if this visit coincided with the Acts 15

narrative For this reason I am inclined to see this visit as either corresponding to the Acts 11

visit or another unspecified visit to Jerusalem

Paul cites three different reasons for his visit to Jerusalem on this occasion Firstly it is in

accordance with a revelation Paul does not identify whether this revelation in particular

was given to him directly In any case it grounds Paulrsquos movements in Godrsquos activity and

purpose Secondly he presents to lsquothemrsquo his gospel in conjunction with the third reason to

ensure his gospel work wasnrsquot in vain

Understandably it can seem that Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel to the Jerusalem leaders

is to gain their approval but broader considerations render this unlikely Paul has been

arguing for the God-revealed autonomous nature of his gospel He doesnrsquot personally need

the Jerusalem leadersrsquo approval or blessing No rather Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel is to

confirm the unity of his gospel with the Jerusalem leaders the Jewish-apostolate and so to

reject claims that Paulrsquos gospel work was half-done which left open a path for his Judaising

opponents to sneak in and lsquocompletersquo Paulrsquos gospel work

At this point attention to pronouns becomes more necessary I think a good case can be

maintained that the language of lsquowersquo throughout most of Galatians refers to Jewish-

background believers in Christ while lsquoyoursquo has in view Gentile-background believers ie the

Galatians So Paul notes that Titus though a Greek was not compelled to be circumcised

The Jerusalem church did not require entrance and observance of Torah from a Gentile-

believer

The grammar of 4-6 is somewhat discontinuous All of verse 4 prepares for verse 5 so that

Paulrsquos refusal to yield is the main concept The false-brothers of verse 4 are the Jerusalem

6 Who are the poor The marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the poor in general which is an expression of Christian faith

counterparts to the opponents in Galatia ndash Judaising believers who seek Torah-observance

The lsquoour libertyrsquo in v4 refers to the very liberty that even Jewish-background believers in

Christ have a freedom from the Law which Paul will elaborate latter in the epistle Yet

Paulrsquos defence of his liberty has the Gentiles in view ndash v5 Gentile freedom from Law-

observance depends upon Jewish freedom from the same

In verse 6 Paul notes that the Jerusalem leaders added nothing additional to his gospel This

matches his purpose in coming to Jerusalem ndash to attest to the agreement in gospel

proclamation between his gospel and their gospel so that the unity of the gospel might be

established not so that Paulrsquos gospel might be approved Thus Paul defends both the

autonomy of his gospel and its congruity with the other apostlesrsquo message

Paulrsquos repeated disavowal of respect for status in these verses also deserves some

comment The δοκεῖν language should not be treated as suggesting insincerity as if Paul

were saying lsquothose who seemed to be something (but arenrsquot)rsquo This is an English connotation

to the language of lsquoseemingrsquo that does not apply in the Greek Paulrsquos point is probably rather

that being unacquainted with the Jerusalem church these were those who did indeed

appear to him to be important and proven leaders Yet he also makes the point that

lsquowhatever they were formerly matters nothing to mersquo The presence of the word ποτε

suggests that Paulrsquos disconcern for their status has more to do with their former way of life

indeed all our former ways of life than present reality His aside that πρόσωπον [ὁ] θεὸς

ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει draws from Dt 1017 with some minor alterations The concept is

prominent elsewhere in James in referring to Godrsquos impartiality

Verses 7-8 then concentrate on the difference between Paul and the Jerusalem leaders The

expressions τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας and τῆς περιτομῆς should be understood as the

receivers of that gospel proclamation so that Paulrsquos apostolate extends to the Gentiles

whereas Peterrsquos focuses on the Jews This division of mission fields is confirmed in v9 with

the right hand of fellowship given to Paul and Barnabas for their Gentile-mission work The

final comment of v10 may sound like an addition to Paulrsquos teachings but Paul emphasises

that it is already his own concern There is some debate about who lsquothe poorrsquo are whether

the marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the

poor in general as an expression of Christian faith In light of the ethical dimensions of later

Galatians I would suggest that it is the economically poor within the Christian community

and in light of the historical factors particularly those suffering in connection with the

Jerusalem church

211-21

Text 11 Ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν Κηφᾶς εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ ἀντέστην ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦνmiddot 12 πρὸ

τοῦ γὰρ ἐλθεῖν τινας ἀπὸ Ἰακώβου μετὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν συνήσθιενmiddot ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον ὑπέστελλεν καὶ

ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτόν φοβούμενος τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς 13 καὶ συνυπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ

Ἰουδαῖοι ὥστε καὶ Βαρναβᾶς συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει 14 ἀλλʼ ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ

ὀρθοποδοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ ἔμπροσθεν πάντωνmiddot Εἰ σὺ

Ἰουδαῖος ὑπάρχων ἐθνικῶς καὶ οὐκ Ἰουδαϊκῶς ζῇς πῶς τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις Ἰουδαΐζειν 15 Ἡμεῖς

φύσει Ἰουδαῖοι καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἐθνῶν ἁμαρτωλοί 16 εἰδότες δὲ ὅτι οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν ἵνα

δικαιωθῶμεν ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται

πᾶσα σάρξ 17 εἰ δὲ ζητοῦντες δικαιωθῆναι ἐν Χριστῷ εὑρέθημεν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἁμαρτωλοί ἆρα Χριστὸς

ἁμαρτίας διάκονος μὴ γένοιτοmiddot 18 εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομῶ παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν

συνιστάνω 19 ἐγὼ γὰρ διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον ἵνα θεῷ ζήσωmiddot Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαιmiddot 20 ζῶ δὲ

οὐκέτι ἐγώ ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστόςmiddot ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ

ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ 21 οὐκ ἀθετῶ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦmiddot εἰ γὰρ διὰ

νόμου δικαιοσύνη ἄρα Χριστὸς δωρεὰν ἀπέθανεν

Textual Criticism

12 τινας τινα ndash the manuscript support for the former is strong and diverse and the former

reading is more logical in the context

12 ἦλθον ἦλθεν ndash the manuscript support is slightly more even on this variation but the

former reading is preferable matching the τινας of the preceding

Translation

11 But when Kephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face because he was

condemned 12 for before the coming of certain men from Jacob he ate together with the

Gentiles but when they came he drew back and separated himself fearing those of the

Circumcision 13 and the remaining Jews joined him in hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was

led astray by their hypocrisy 14 But when I saw that they were not dealing straight in line

with the truth of the gospel I said to Kephas before all ldquoIf you being a Jew do not live in a

Jewish manner why do you compel the nations to Judaise 15 We by nature are Jews and

not sinners of the Nations 16 but knowing that a human being is not justified by the works

of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ even we believed in Christ Jesus so that we

might be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law because by the works of the

law all flesh will not be justified 17 But if we are found to be seeking to be justified in Christ

and are ourselves sinners then is Christ a servant of sin Not so 18 For I through the law

died to the law so that I might live to God I have been co-crucified with Christ 20 and I no

longer live but Christ lives in me what I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God

that loved me and gave himself on my behalf 21 I do not nullify the grace of God for if

through the law came righteousness then Christ died vainly

Comments

In verse 11 we have both the continuations of Paulrsquos temporally marked biographical

defence but also the introduction of a new sequence Peter comes to Antioch and there is

a division between Peter and Paul which Paul goes on to relate Paul gives the reason for his

strong opposition ndash Peter lsquowas condemnedrsquo This may be understood as lsquoPeter stood

condemnedrsquo by his actions Paul then explains the basis for Peterrsquos condemnation in verse

12 His former practice was to share table-fellowship to eat with the Gentile believes (with

lsquothe nationsrsquo) an action that Paul understands as being in line with the Gospel message

And indeed Peter does too based upon Acts at least Yet a new party comes to Antioch

lsquocertain men from Jacob (James)rsquo While Peter and James certainly represent a Christianity

more deeply embedded in Jewish cultural practices it is a mistake to overread this diversity

Debate continues about how we should understand the relationship between these men

and James himself Are they authorised Do they represent James and Jamesrsquo position Acts

15 suggests not On this basis I am inclined to see the party as a group associated with

Jamesrsquo more Jewish Christian practice but more conservative than James himself and not

an authorised delegation by any means They have some association with James and

represent themselves as coming from him

Paul makes Peterrsquos very separation a gospel-issue That is the basis of Paulrsquos condemnation

of Peter Not that eating with Jews or eating according to Jewish food laws is wrong But

that to do so in a context that separates oneself from Gentile believers carries a

communication that they do not have genuine fellowship together

So much so that verse 13 introduces the language of hypocrisy Peterrsquos actions are out of

line with his own beliefs No doubt that if questioned Peterrsquos response would be some kind

of accommodation-line The point here is that in seeking not to offend the Jewish faction

Peter is in fact undermining the gospel message by cutting off the Gentile believers

So Paul confronts Peter in v14 as he observes that there practice does not align with lsquothe

truth of the Gospelrsquo His question highlights Peterrsquos hypocrisy since Peter is a Jew and is

free from the Law and so regularly eats and lives like a Gentile how can he in fact force

Gentiles to live in a Jewish manner This is the outcome of Peterrsquos withdrawal ndash it sends the

message that Gentile believers will need to lsquoJudaisersquo in order to have full insider-status in

the new Christian movement Even though Peter himself makes no move to lsquocompelrsquo the

Gentiles his actions are tantamount to the same

It is unclear when the speech of Paul shifts from historical recollection of conversation with

Peter to epistolary discourse with the Galatians but it is certainly not before v15 The lsquowersquo

of v15 follows (or establishes if you prefer) the distinct referents of we vs you in the letter

We referring at least to Paul and Peter but by implication other Jewish-background

believers is used to distinguish Peter and Paul from lsquoGentile sinnersrsquo Paul asserts this as a

statement of who they are lsquoby naturersquo They were born as Jews and so were not unclean

Gentiles And yet even being such Jews Paul adds the participial phrase of v16 lsquoknowing

that a human being is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christrsquo

Paul here states the key theological principle that drives both his rebuke of Peter and his

argument within Galatians He draws upon Psalm 1432 with a shift from πᾶς ζῶν to πᾶσα

σάρξ but more importantly adds ἐξ ἔργων νόμου The future tense δικαιωθήσεται may

refer to a decisively eschatological justification rather than a generic one This will have

important theological implications

Immediately then we enter into two significant debates The first is concerning the phrase ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου works of the Law For my part I am unpersuaded by the arguments of the NPP

to understand this as something like lsquoJewish boundary markers of ethno-religious identityrsquo

It certainly fails to function that way in Galatians Neither should it be pushed to a generic

lsquolegalismrsquo Rather it expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant context which

appears to be what the Judaising-teachers in Galatia are pushing for

The second is debate over the meaning of lsquorighteousnessrsquo and lsquojustifyrsquo language Again I find

the NPP unpersuasive That a la Wright justification should be redefined in largely

covenant-inclusion terms seems to make a nonsense of justification language at all I stand

with a traditional stream that sees lsquoto justifyrsquo to have legal connotations and to include the

idea of declaring and so performatively making right More on this to come

v16 then expresses Paulrsquos conviction from the scriptures that a human being is not (and

cannot) be right before God through obedience to the Law but can be so justified can be so

right through faith in Jesus Christ (In some instances I suppose one might take lsquofaith of

Jesus Christrsquo to refer to Jesusrsquo faithfulness but I find this position also unconvincing) The

fact that Peter and Paul both know this is why they as Jews trusted in Christ ndash there was

no salvation for them through the (works of the) Law Paul is triply emphatic here he first

declares what lsquowersquo (Jewish believers) know [justification through faith not works of law]

then declares that they believed in Christ so that [justification through faith not works of

law] because [justification through faith not works of law] Peter and Paul are in agreement

that one has to stop lsquodoingrsquo the Law

In v17 Paul raises the question if as believers in Christ and no longer Law-observers we are

lsquosinnersrsquo in that same old covenant sense that Paul raises back in v15 does this in fact make

the Messiah a servant or minister of sin Paulrsquos emphatic μὴ γένοιτο not only rules this out

but is an expression of its absurdity v18 gives the reason lsquoSinnerrsquo in the lsquoGentile sinnerrsquo

sense is an empty term ndash itrsquos been robbed of its meaning by the coming of the new

covenantal reality Rather to go back to the Law to the old covenantal reality would in fact

make Paul a transgressor In re-establishing the Law as a principle for life and obedience

before God the inevitable outcome is sin by the standard of the Law and so condemnation

by the Law Implicit in Paulrsquos argument is that Peterrsquos choice to withdraw from Gentile

company and meals is based on an observance of the Law not only not necessary any more

but in fact a return to it undoes and undermines the Gospel freedom that faith in Christ

brings

The final three verses shift to a very personal note as Paul relates his own salvific existential

reality The Law was the means of Paulrsquos death insofar as he was condemned by the Law

because the Law is a mechanism of death The Law produces neither righteousness nor life

with respect to God It isnrsquot designed to do so And yet Paulrsquos death to Law through Law is

the means for life ndash only through dying to the Law can the Jewish Paul live unto God Paul

immediately links such Law-death to the crucifixion Paulrsquos co-crucifixion with Christ is his

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

v18 Κηφᾶν is supported by strong textual witnesses while Πέτρον is almost certainly a later

substitution of the more familiar Greek name for the apostle Such a variation occurs several

later times in the epistle which I will simply note without comment

Translation

10 For do I now persuade men or God or do I seek to please men For if I still were

pleasing men I would not be a slave of Christ 11 For I make known to you brothers the

gospel proclaimed by me that it is not merely human in nature 12 For neither did I receive

it from men nor was taught it but through a revelation of Jesus Christ 13 For you heard my

way of life formerly in Judaism that I persecuted the church of God in an extreme manner

and attempted to destroy it 14 and was advancing in Judaism beyond many of the cohort of

my generation being an extreme zealot for my ancestral traditions 15 But when [God]

having set me apart from my motherrsquos womb and calling me through his grace 16 revealed

his son in me so that I might preach him among the nations [Gentiles] I did not

immediately consult with flesh and blood 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those apostles

that precede me but I departed into Arabia and returned again to Damascus 18 Then after

three years I went up to Jerusalem to pay an inquiring visit to Kephas and I stayed with him

fifteen days 19 but another of the apostles I did not see except Jacob the brother of the

Lord 20 which things I write to you see Before God I am not lying 21 Then I went into the

regions of Syria and Cilicia 22 I was unknown by face to the churches of Judaea that are in

Christ 23 They only were hearing that the one formerly persecuting them now preached the

Faith which formerly he sought to destroy 24 and they glorified God because of me

Comments

Although some read πείθω and ἀρέσκειν as having virtually the same force I think it better

to give each an independent force So Paul raises the question about (a) persuading and (b)

pleasing and implies a dichotomy between the two Is the object of his persuasive efforts

God or men The second clause of 10 lsquoor do I seek to please menrsquo along with the answer in

10c resolves the rhetorical questions Paul isnrsquot making a rhetorical defence before God

since he has no need to persuade God nor purpose in doing so but rather seeks to please

God On the other hand his persuasive attempts are directed towards human beings which

is why he doesnrsquot seek to please human beings In 10c Paul suggests that service (slavery) to

Christ necessarily rules out pleasing men This verse sets up the tone of the rest of the

passage which will launch into Paulrsquos defence of his gospel and apostleship

v11 then functions as a Topic sentence about the nature and origin of Paulrsquos gospel It is not

κατὰ ἄνθρωπον lsquoaccording to menrsquo which should probably be understood as lsquobeing human

in nature and characteristicsrsquo The reason for its non-human character is v12 its non human

origins ndash neither received (the passing on of tradition) from a human being nor taught it

but by a direct supernatural revelation whose agent and source if Jesus Christ

Paulrsquos backing (γὰρ) for the radical nature of this revelation is point to his former way of life

lsquoin Judaismrsquo However we want to read the parting of the ways Paul is prepared to see his

former life as part of a distinct religious identity of lsquoJudaismrsquo There is real irony that to

lsquoadvance in Judaismrsquo was to lsquopersecute τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ a phrase which has the

Jewish identity of lsquoIsraelrsquo but which Paul now situates as lsquoGodrsquos assemblyrsquo To advance in

Judaism was to persecute the Israel of God (cf 616) Though I would be reluctant to assert

any literary or direct connection the zeal for τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων matches well

with Jesusrsquo own engagement with the Pharisaical schools as in Mark 71-23

The construction of v15 is odd partly because the flow of thought introduced by lsquobut when

God was pleasedrsquo is interrupted by an extended description of God in terms of Paulrsquos

setting-apart from the womb and calling The phrase is drawn from Isaiah 491 with further

correspondence to Jeremiah 15 and situates Paulrsquos calling in terms of the Old Testament

prophets What other category for calling would Paul have drawn upon For this reason I

cannot sanction interpretations that want to deny a conversion experience to Paul in place

of a lsquocallingrsquo experience Paulrsquos radical thennow JudaismChrist constructions rules out a

purely intra-Judaism development

The nature of Paulrsquos calling is specified in v16 to preach the gospel to the nations Nations

here should be understood in its typical sense lsquoGentilesrsquo hence my inclusion in brackets

Thus Paulrsquos calling and conversion to some extent coincide Whether v16 ἐν ἐμοί is to be

taken as lsquoin mersquo as the location of the revelation or else instrumentally lsquoby mersquo to Paulrsquos

ongoing revelation of the Christ through his preaching is open to debate Though Paulrsquos

ongoing preaching is logically dependent upon the revelation of the Christ to him

Paul now emphasises the autonomy of his initial period He did not lsquoconsult with flesh and

bloodrsquo ndash reinforcing his earlier comment in v12 about the non-human origin and teaching of

his gospel v17 likewise disassociates his gospel activity from the Jerusalem-apostles Rather

Paul went to Arabia (ie the Nabataean kingdom) and specifically Damascus

The three year gap before Paul visits Jerusalem gives his gospel and apostleship a lsquodistancersquo

from the Jerusalem apostles which serves as Paulrsquos defence of its independence He does

not deny dealing with the Jerusalem apostles but is keen to delineate his autobiography in

terms that demonstrate that independence So v18 he mentions his visit to Kephas (Peter)

which lasted 15 days and involved no other major Jerusalem identities beyond Jacob

(James) the brother of Jesus v20 is a meta-comment upon the narrative itself ndash Paul draws

attention to his self-disclosure and attests to his truthfulness v21-24 summarise events

beyond that initial visit ndash his return into Syria and Cilicia the fact that he was not acquainted

in person with Judean churches and they praised God

We might also note that Paulrsquos visit to Jerusalem here is informal There is not delegation

no officiality just Paul coming to Jerusalem and meeting two Christian leaders He is again

emphasising that he didnrsquot lsquogetrsquo his gospel on this occasion Indeed cross-checking with Acts

reveals his prior gospel ministry Secondly lsquothe Faithrsquo in v23 is a remarkably Christian

expression since Christianity as a religion is built upon lsquoFaithrsquo To speak of other religious

traditions as lsquofaithsrsquo is to import a key Christian distinctive into them that is not necessarily

present So Paul can speak of preaching the Faith in a unique sense of the word This

section 111-24 repeatedly hammers the defence of the source of Paulrsquos gospel and Paulrsquos

apostleship

21-10

Text 21 Ἔπειτα διὰ δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν πάλιν ἀνέβην εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα μετὰ Βαρναβᾶ συμπαραλαβὼν καὶ

Τίτονmiddot 2 ἀνέβην δὲ κατὰ ἀποκάλυψινmiddot καὶ ἀνεθέμην αὐτοῖς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ κηρύσσω ἐν τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν κατʼ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς δοκοῦσιν μή πως εἰς κενὸν τρέχω ἢ ἔδραμον 3 ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ Τίτος ὁ σὺν

ἐμοί Ἕλλην ὤν ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναιmiddot 4 διὰ δὲ τοὺς παρεισάκτους ψευδαδέλφους οἵτινες

παρεισῆλθον κατασκοπῆσαι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ἡμῶν ἣν ἔχομεν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα ἡμᾶς

καταδουλώσουσινmdash 5 οἷς οὐδὲ πρὸς ὥραν εἴξαμεν τῇ ὑποταγῇ ἵνα ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίου

διαμείνῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς 6 ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τιmdash ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι διαφέρειmiddot

πρόσωπον θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνειmdash ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο 7 ἀλλὰ

τοὐναντίον ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς 8

ὁ γὰρ ἐνεργήσας Πέτρῳ εἰς ἀποστολὴν τῆς περιτομῆς ἐνήργησεν καὶ ἐμοὶ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη 9 καὶ γνόντες

τὴν χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι Ἰάκωβος καὶ Κηφᾶς καὶ Ἰωάννης οἱ δοκοῦντες στῦλοι εἶναι δεξιὰς

ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρναβᾷ κοινωνίας ἵνα ἡμεῖς εἰς τὰ ἔθνη αὐτοὶ δὲ εἰς τὴν περιτομήνmiddot 10 μόνον τῶν

πτωχῶν ἵνα μνημονεύωμεν ὃ καὶ ἐσπούδασα αὐτὸ τοῦτο ποιῆσαι5

Textual Criticism

πάλιν ἀνέβην in v1 has both early and diverse attestation The reverse order is supported by

mainly Western texts In any case the significance would be virtually zero

In v5 several texts omit οἷς which grammatically smooths the text omission of οὐδέ on the

other hand might harmonise Paulrsquos yielding with Act 163 (so Metzger conjectures) but

would run directly contrary to Paulrsquos Galatian argument

v9 the reading of the names is altered in some texts with the more familiar Πέτρος

substituted for Κηφᾶς and brought to the front for prominence

Translation

1 Then after 14 years I again went up to Jerusalem taking with me Barnabas and Titus 2 I

went up in accordance with a revelation and I presented to them the gospel which I preach

among the nations privately to those that seemed good lest somehow I am running or

have run in vain 3 but not even Titus who was with me being a Greek was compelled to be

circumcised 4 now on account of the snuck-in pseudo-brothers who snuck in to spy out our

liberty which we have in Christ Jesus that they might enslave us 5 to whom not even for an

hour did we yield to subjugation so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you

6 But from those that seemed to be something ndash whatever they were formerly matters

nothing to me (God does not judge men at face-value) ndash for those who seemed to be

5 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 2

regarded added nothing to me 7 but rather seeing that I have been entrusted with the

gospel of the uncircumcision just as Peter of the uncircumcision 8 for the One operating

through Peter for the apostolate of the uncircumcised worked also through me to the

nations 9 and knowing the grace that was given to me Jacob and Kephas and John those

seeming to be pillars gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship so that we unto

the nations and they unto the circumcision 10 only that we should remember the poor6

which this very thing I was eager to do

Comments

The temporal sequencing of Paulrsquos autobiographical material continues with the initial

Ἔπειτα The 14 year gap between Paulrsquos first initial visit and this second visit again confirms

Paulrsquos autonomous gospel ministry Commentators divide over whether this visit accords

with Acts 15 Acts 11 or another occasion altogether Given that the council in Acts 15

provides a clear statement of Gentile law-observance it seems odd that Paul would not cite

nor bring that letter to bear on the Galatian scenario if this visit coincided with the Acts 15

narrative For this reason I am inclined to see this visit as either corresponding to the Acts 11

visit or another unspecified visit to Jerusalem

Paul cites three different reasons for his visit to Jerusalem on this occasion Firstly it is in

accordance with a revelation Paul does not identify whether this revelation in particular

was given to him directly In any case it grounds Paulrsquos movements in Godrsquos activity and

purpose Secondly he presents to lsquothemrsquo his gospel in conjunction with the third reason to

ensure his gospel work wasnrsquot in vain

Understandably it can seem that Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel to the Jerusalem leaders

is to gain their approval but broader considerations render this unlikely Paul has been

arguing for the God-revealed autonomous nature of his gospel He doesnrsquot personally need

the Jerusalem leadersrsquo approval or blessing No rather Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel is to

confirm the unity of his gospel with the Jerusalem leaders the Jewish-apostolate and so to

reject claims that Paulrsquos gospel work was half-done which left open a path for his Judaising

opponents to sneak in and lsquocompletersquo Paulrsquos gospel work

At this point attention to pronouns becomes more necessary I think a good case can be

maintained that the language of lsquowersquo throughout most of Galatians refers to Jewish-

background believers in Christ while lsquoyoursquo has in view Gentile-background believers ie the

Galatians So Paul notes that Titus though a Greek was not compelled to be circumcised

The Jerusalem church did not require entrance and observance of Torah from a Gentile-

believer

The grammar of 4-6 is somewhat discontinuous All of verse 4 prepares for verse 5 so that

Paulrsquos refusal to yield is the main concept The false-brothers of verse 4 are the Jerusalem

6 Who are the poor The marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the poor in general which is an expression of Christian faith

counterparts to the opponents in Galatia ndash Judaising believers who seek Torah-observance

The lsquoour libertyrsquo in v4 refers to the very liberty that even Jewish-background believers in

Christ have a freedom from the Law which Paul will elaborate latter in the epistle Yet

Paulrsquos defence of his liberty has the Gentiles in view ndash v5 Gentile freedom from Law-

observance depends upon Jewish freedom from the same

In verse 6 Paul notes that the Jerusalem leaders added nothing additional to his gospel This

matches his purpose in coming to Jerusalem ndash to attest to the agreement in gospel

proclamation between his gospel and their gospel so that the unity of the gospel might be

established not so that Paulrsquos gospel might be approved Thus Paul defends both the

autonomy of his gospel and its congruity with the other apostlesrsquo message

Paulrsquos repeated disavowal of respect for status in these verses also deserves some

comment The δοκεῖν language should not be treated as suggesting insincerity as if Paul

were saying lsquothose who seemed to be something (but arenrsquot)rsquo This is an English connotation

to the language of lsquoseemingrsquo that does not apply in the Greek Paulrsquos point is probably rather

that being unacquainted with the Jerusalem church these were those who did indeed

appear to him to be important and proven leaders Yet he also makes the point that

lsquowhatever they were formerly matters nothing to mersquo The presence of the word ποτε

suggests that Paulrsquos disconcern for their status has more to do with their former way of life

indeed all our former ways of life than present reality His aside that πρόσωπον [ὁ] θεὸς

ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει draws from Dt 1017 with some minor alterations The concept is

prominent elsewhere in James in referring to Godrsquos impartiality

Verses 7-8 then concentrate on the difference between Paul and the Jerusalem leaders The

expressions τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας and τῆς περιτομῆς should be understood as the

receivers of that gospel proclamation so that Paulrsquos apostolate extends to the Gentiles

whereas Peterrsquos focuses on the Jews This division of mission fields is confirmed in v9 with

the right hand of fellowship given to Paul and Barnabas for their Gentile-mission work The

final comment of v10 may sound like an addition to Paulrsquos teachings but Paul emphasises

that it is already his own concern There is some debate about who lsquothe poorrsquo are whether

the marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the

poor in general as an expression of Christian faith In light of the ethical dimensions of later

Galatians I would suggest that it is the economically poor within the Christian community

and in light of the historical factors particularly those suffering in connection with the

Jerusalem church

211-21

Text 11 Ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν Κηφᾶς εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ ἀντέστην ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦνmiddot 12 πρὸ

τοῦ γὰρ ἐλθεῖν τινας ἀπὸ Ἰακώβου μετὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν συνήσθιενmiddot ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον ὑπέστελλεν καὶ

ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτόν φοβούμενος τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς 13 καὶ συνυπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ

Ἰουδαῖοι ὥστε καὶ Βαρναβᾶς συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει 14 ἀλλʼ ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ

ὀρθοποδοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ ἔμπροσθεν πάντωνmiddot Εἰ σὺ

Ἰουδαῖος ὑπάρχων ἐθνικῶς καὶ οὐκ Ἰουδαϊκῶς ζῇς πῶς τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις Ἰουδαΐζειν 15 Ἡμεῖς

φύσει Ἰουδαῖοι καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἐθνῶν ἁμαρτωλοί 16 εἰδότες δὲ ὅτι οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν ἵνα

δικαιωθῶμεν ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται

πᾶσα σάρξ 17 εἰ δὲ ζητοῦντες δικαιωθῆναι ἐν Χριστῷ εὑρέθημεν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἁμαρτωλοί ἆρα Χριστὸς

ἁμαρτίας διάκονος μὴ γένοιτοmiddot 18 εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομῶ παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν

συνιστάνω 19 ἐγὼ γὰρ διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον ἵνα θεῷ ζήσωmiddot Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαιmiddot 20 ζῶ δὲ

οὐκέτι ἐγώ ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστόςmiddot ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ

ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ 21 οὐκ ἀθετῶ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦmiddot εἰ γὰρ διὰ

νόμου δικαιοσύνη ἄρα Χριστὸς δωρεὰν ἀπέθανεν

Textual Criticism

12 τινας τινα ndash the manuscript support for the former is strong and diverse and the former

reading is more logical in the context

12 ἦλθον ἦλθεν ndash the manuscript support is slightly more even on this variation but the

former reading is preferable matching the τινας of the preceding

Translation

11 But when Kephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face because he was

condemned 12 for before the coming of certain men from Jacob he ate together with the

Gentiles but when they came he drew back and separated himself fearing those of the

Circumcision 13 and the remaining Jews joined him in hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was

led astray by their hypocrisy 14 But when I saw that they were not dealing straight in line

with the truth of the gospel I said to Kephas before all ldquoIf you being a Jew do not live in a

Jewish manner why do you compel the nations to Judaise 15 We by nature are Jews and

not sinners of the Nations 16 but knowing that a human being is not justified by the works

of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ even we believed in Christ Jesus so that we

might be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law because by the works of the

law all flesh will not be justified 17 But if we are found to be seeking to be justified in Christ

and are ourselves sinners then is Christ a servant of sin Not so 18 For I through the law

died to the law so that I might live to God I have been co-crucified with Christ 20 and I no

longer live but Christ lives in me what I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God

that loved me and gave himself on my behalf 21 I do not nullify the grace of God for if

through the law came righteousness then Christ died vainly

Comments

In verse 11 we have both the continuations of Paulrsquos temporally marked biographical

defence but also the introduction of a new sequence Peter comes to Antioch and there is

a division between Peter and Paul which Paul goes on to relate Paul gives the reason for his

strong opposition ndash Peter lsquowas condemnedrsquo This may be understood as lsquoPeter stood

condemnedrsquo by his actions Paul then explains the basis for Peterrsquos condemnation in verse

12 His former practice was to share table-fellowship to eat with the Gentile believes (with

lsquothe nationsrsquo) an action that Paul understands as being in line with the Gospel message

And indeed Peter does too based upon Acts at least Yet a new party comes to Antioch

lsquocertain men from Jacob (James)rsquo While Peter and James certainly represent a Christianity

more deeply embedded in Jewish cultural practices it is a mistake to overread this diversity

Debate continues about how we should understand the relationship between these men

and James himself Are they authorised Do they represent James and Jamesrsquo position Acts

15 suggests not On this basis I am inclined to see the party as a group associated with

Jamesrsquo more Jewish Christian practice but more conservative than James himself and not

an authorised delegation by any means They have some association with James and

represent themselves as coming from him

Paul makes Peterrsquos very separation a gospel-issue That is the basis of Paulrsquos condemnation

of Peter Not that eating with Jews or eating according to Jewish food laws is wrong But

that to do so in a context that separates oneself from Gentile believers carries a

communication that they do not have genuine fellowship together

So much so that verse 13 introduces the language of hypocrisy Peterrsquos actions are out of

line with his own beliefs No doubt that if questioned Peterrsquos response would be some kind

of accommodation-line The point here is that in seeking not to offend the Jewish faction

Peter is in fact undermining the gospel message by cutting off the Gentile believers

So Paul confronts Peter in v14 as he observes that there practice does not align with lsquothe

truth of the Gospelrsquo His question highlights Peterrsquos hypocrisy since Peter is a Jew and is

free from the Law and so regularly eats and lives like a Gentile how can he in fact force

Gentiles to live in a Jewish manner This is the outcome of Peterrsquos withdrawal ndash it sends the

message that Gentile believers will need to lsquoJudaisersquo in order to have full insider-status in

the new Christian movement Even though Peter himself makes no move to lsquocompelrsquo the

Gentiles his actions are tantamount to the same

It is unclear when the speech of Paul shifts from historical recollection of conversation with

Peter to epistolary discourse with the Galatians but it is certainly not before v15 The lsquowersquo

of v15 follows (or establishes if you prefer) the distinct referents of we vs you in the letter

We referring at least to Paul and Peter but by implication other Jewish-background

believers is used to distinguish Peter and Paul from lsquoGentile sinnersrsquo Paul asserts this as a

statement of who they are lsquoby naturersquo They were born as Jews and so were not unclean

Gentiles And yet even being such Jews Paul adds the participial phrase of v16 lsquoknowing

that a human being is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christrsquo

Paul here states the key theological principle that drives both his rebuke of Peter and his

argument within Galatians He draws upon Psalm 1432 with a shift from πᾶς ζῶν to πᾶσα

σάρξ but more importantly adds ἐξ ἔργων νόμου The future tense δικαιωθήσεται may

refer to a decisively eschatological justification rather than a generic one This will have

important theological implications

Immediately then we enter into two significant debates The first is concerning the phrase ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου works of the Law For my part I am unpersuaded by the arguments of the NPP

to understand this as something like lsquoJewish boundary markers of ethno-religious identityrsquo

It certainly fails to function that way in Galatians Neither should it be pushed to a generic

lsquolegalismrsquo Rather it expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant context which

appears to be what the Judaising-teachers in Galatia are pushing for

The second is debate over the meaning of lsquorighteousnessrsquo and lsquojustifyrsquo language Again I find

the NPP unpersuasive That a la Wright justification should be redefined in largely

covenant-inclusion terms seems to make a nonsense of justification language at all I stand

with a traditional stream that sees lsquoto justifyrsquo to have legal connotations and to include the

idea of declaring and so performatively making right More on this to come

v16 then expresses Paulrsquos conviction from the scriptures that a human being is not (and

cannot) be right before God through obedience to the Law but can be so justified can be so

right through faith in Jesus Christ (In some instances I suppose one might take lsquofaith of

Jesus Christrsquo to refer to Jesusrsquo faithfulness but I find this position also unconvincing) The

fact that Peter and Paul both know this is why they as Jews trusted in Christ ndash there was

no salvation for them through the (works of the) Law Paul is triply emphatic here he first

declares what lsquowersquo (Jewish believers) know [justification through faith not works of law]

then declares that they believed in Christ so that [justification through faith not works of

law] because [justification through faith not works of law] Peter and Paul are in agreement

that one has to stop lsquodoingrsquo the Law

In v17 Paul raises the question if as believers in Christ and no longer Law-observers we are

lsquosinnersrsquo in that same old covenant sense that Paul raises back in v15 does this in fact make

the Messiah a servant or minister of sin Paulrsquos emphatic μὴ γένοιτο not only rules this out

but is an expression of its absurdity v18 gives the reason lsquoSinnerrsquo in the lsquoGentile sinnerrsquo

sense is an empty term ndash itrsquos been robbed of its meaning by the coming of the new

covenantal reality Rather to go back to the Law to the old covenantal reality would in fact

make Paul a transgressor In re-establishing the Law as a principle for life and obedience

before God the inevitable outcome is sin by the standard of the Law and so condemnation

by the Law Implicit in Paulrsquos argument is that Peterrsquos choice to withdraw from Gentile

company and meals is based on an observance of the Law not only not necessary any more

but in fact a return to it undoes and undermines the Gospel freedom that faith in Christ

brings

The final three verses shift to a very personal note as Paul relates his own salvific existential

reality The Law was the means of Paulrsquos death insofar as he was condemned by the Law

because the Law is a mechanism of death The Law produces neither righteousness nor life

with respect to God It isnrsquot designed to do so And yet Paulrsquos death to Law through Law is

the means for life ndash only through dying to the Law can the Jewish Paul live unto God Paul

immediately links such Law-death to the crucifixion Paulrsquos co-crucifixion with Christ is his

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

former life as part of a distinct religious identity of lsquoJudaismrsquo There is real irony that to

lsquoadvance in Judaismrsquo was to lsquopersecute τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ a phrase which has the

Jewish identity of lsquoIsraelrsquo but which Paul now situates as lsquoGodrsquos assemblyrsquo To advance in

Judaism was to persecute the Israel of God (cf 616) Though I would be reluctant to assert

any literary or direct connection the zeal for τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων matches well

with Jesusrsquo own engagement with the Pharisaical schools as in Mark 71-23

The construction of v15 is odd partly because the flow of thought introduced by lsquobut when

God was pleasedrsquo is interrupted by an extended description of God in terms of Paulrsquos

setting-apart from the womb and calling The phrase is drawn from Isaiah 491 with further

correspondence to Jeremiah 15 and situates Paulrsquos calling in terms of the Old Testament

prophets What other category for calling would Paul have drawn upon For this reason I

cannot sanction interpretations that want to deny a conversion experience to Paul in place

of a lsquocallingrsquo experience Paulrsquos radical thennow JudaismChrist constructions rules out a

purely intra-Judaism development

The nature of Paulrsquos calling is specified in v16 to preach the gospel to the nations Nations

here should be understood in its typical sense lsquoGentilesrsquo hence my inclusion in brackets

Thus Paulrsquos calling and conversion to some extent coincide Whether v16 ἐν ἐμοί is to be

taken as lsquoin mersquo as the location of the revelation or else instrumentally lsquoby mersquo to Paulrsquos

ongoing revelation of the Christ through his preaching is open to debate Though Paulrsquos

ongoing preaching is logically dependent upon the revelation of the Christ to him

Paul now emphasises the autonomy of his initial period He did not lsquoconsult with flesh and

bloodrsquo ndash reinforcing his earlier comment in v12 about the non-human origin and teaching of

his gospel v17 likewise disassociates his gospel activity from the Jerusalem-apostles Rather

Paul went to Arabia (ie the Nabataean kingdom) and specifically Damascus

The three year gap before Paul visits Jerusalem gives his gospel and apostleship a lsquodistancersquo

from the Jerusalem apostles which serves as Paulrsquos defence of its independence He does

not deny dealing with the Jerusalem apostles but is keen to delineate his autobiography in

terms that demonstrate that independence So v18 he mentions his visit to Kephas (Peter)

which lasted 15 days and involved no other major Jerusalem identities beyond Jacob

(James) the brother of Jesus v20 is a meta-comment upon the narrative itself ndash Paul draws

attention to his self-disclosure and attests to his truthfulness v21-24 summarise events

beyond that initial visit ndash his return into Syria and Cilicia the fact that he was not acquainted

in person with Judean churches and they praised God

We might also note that Paulrsquos visit to Jerusalem here is informal There is not delegation

no officiality just Paul coming to Jerusalem and meeting two Christian leaders He is again

emphasising that he didnrsquot lsquogetrsquo his gospel on this occasion Indeed cross-checking with Acts

reveals his prior gospel ministry Secondly lsquothe Faithrsquo in v23 is a remarkably Christian

expression since Christianity as a religion is built upon lsquoFaithrsquo To speak of other religious

traditions as lsquofaithsrsquo is to import a key Christian distinctive into them that is not necessarily

present So Paul can speak of preaching the Faith in a unique sense of the word This

section 111-24 repeatedly hammers the defence of the source of Paulrsquos gospel and Paulrsquos

apostleship

21-10

Text 21 Ἔπειτα διὰ δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν πάλιν ἀνέβην εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα μετὰ Βαρναβᾶ συμπαραλαβὼν καὶ

Τίτονmiddot 2 ἀνέβην δὲ κατὰ ἀποκάλυψινmiddot καὶ ἀνεθέμην αὐτοῖς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ κηρύσσω ἐν τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν κατʼ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς δοκοῦσιν μή πως εἰς κενὸν τρέχω ἢ ἔδραμον 3 ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ Τίτος ὁ σὺν

ἐμοί Ἕλλην ὤν ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναιmiddot 4 διὰ δὲ τοὺς παρεισάκτους ψευδαδέλφους οἵτινες

παρεισῆλθον κατασκοπῆσαι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ἡμῶν ἣν ἔχομεν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα ἡμᾶς

καταδουλώσουσινmdash 5 οἷς οὐδὲ πρὸς ὥραν εἴξαμεν τῇ ὑποταγῇ ἵνα ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίου

διαμείνῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς 6 ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τιmdash ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι διαφέρειmiddot

πρόσωπον θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνειmdash ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο 7 ἀλλὰ

τοὐναντίον ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς 8

ὁ γὰρ ἐνεργήσας Πέτρῳ εἰς ἀποστολὴν τῆς περιτομῆς ἐνήργησεν καὶ ἐμοὶ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη 9 καὶ γνόντες

τὴν χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι Ἰάκωβος καὶ Κηφᾶς καὶ Ἰωάννης οἱ δοκοῦντες στῦλοι εἶναι δεξιὰς

ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρναβᾷ κοινωνίας ἵνα ἡμεῖς εἰς τὰ ἔθνη αὐτοὶ δὲ εἰς τὴν περιτομήνmiddot 10 μόνον τῶν

πτωχῶν ἵνα μνημονεύωμεν ὃ καὶ ἐσπούδασα αὐτὸ τοῦτο ποιῆσαι5

Textual Criticism

πάλιν ἀνέβην in v1 has both early and diverse attestation The reverse order is supported by

mainly Western texts In any case the significance would be virtually zero

In v5 several texts omit οἷς which grammatically smooths the text omission of οὐδέ on the

other hand might harmonise Paulrsquos yielding with Act 163 (so Metzger conjectures) but

would run directly contrary to Paulrsquos Galatian argument

v9 the reading of the names is altered in some texts with the more familiar Πέτρος

substituted for Κηφᾶς and brought to the front for prominence

Translation

1 Then after 14 years I again went up to Jerusalem taking with me Barnabas and Titus 2 I

went up in accordance with a revelation and I presented to them the gospel which I preach

among the nations privately to those that seemed good lest somehow I am running or

have run in vain 3 but not even Titus who was with me being a Greek was compelled to be

circumcised 4 now on account of the snuck-in pseudo-brothers who snuck in to spy out our

liberty which we have in Christ Jesus that they might enslave us 5 to whom not even for an

hour did we yield to subjugation so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you

6 But from those that seemed to be something ndash whatever they were formerly matters

nothing to me (God does not judge men at face-value) ndash for those who seemed to be

5 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 2

regarded added nothing to me 7 but rather seeing that I have been entrusted with the

gospel of the uncircumcision just as Peter of the uncircumcision 8 for the One operating

through Peter for the apostolate of the uncircumcised worked also through me to the

nations 9 and knowing the grace that was given to me Jacob and Kephas and John those

seeming to be pillars gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship so that we unto

the nations and they unto the circumcision 10 only that we should remember the poor6

which this very thing I was eager to do

Comments

The temporal sequencing of Paulrsquos autobiographical material continues with the initial

Ἔπειτα The 14 year gap between Paulrsquos first initial visit and this second visit again confirms

Paulrsquos autonomous gospel ministry Commentators divide over whether this visit accords

with Acts 15 Acts 11 or another occasion altogether Given that the council in Acts 15

provides a clear statement of Gentile law-observance it seems odd that Paul would not cite

nor bring that letter to bear on the Galatian scenario if this visit coincided with the Acts 15

narrative For this reason I am inclined to see this visit as either corresponding to the Acts 11

visit or another unspecified visit to Jerusalem

Paul cites three different reasons for his visit to Jerusalem on this occasion Firstly it is in

accordance with a revelation Paul does not identify whether this revelation in particular

was given to him directly In any case it grounds Paulrsquos movements in Godrsquos activity and

purpose Secondly he presents to lsquothemrsquo his gospel in conjunction with the third reason to

ensure his gospel work wasnrsquot in vain

Understandably it can seem that Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel to the Jerusalem leaders

is to gain their approval but broader considerations render this unlikely Paul has been

arguing for the God-revealed autonomous nature of his gospel He doesnrsquot personally need

the Jerusalem leadersrsquo approval or blessing No rather Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel is to

confirm the unity of his gospel with the Jerusalem leaders the Jewish-apostolate and so to

reject claims that Paulrsquos gospel work was half-done which left open a path for his Judaising

opponents to sneak in and lsquocompletersquo Paulrsquos gospel work

At this point attention to pronouns becomes more necessary I think a good case can be

maintained that the language of lsquowersquo throughout most of Galatians refers to Jewish-

background believers in Christ while lsquoyoursquo has in view Gentile-background believers ie the

Galatians So Paul notes that Titus though a Greek was not compelled to be circumcised

The Jerusalem church did not require entrance and observance of Torah from a Gentile-

believer

The grammar of 4-6 is somewhat discontinuous All of verse 4 prepares for verse 5 so that

Paulrsquos refusal to yield is the main concept The false-brothers of verse 4 are the Jerusalem

6 Who are the poor The marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the poor in general which is an expression of Christian faith

counterparts to the opponents in Galatia ndash Judaising believers who seek Torah-observance

The lsquoour libertyrsquo in v4 refers to the very liberty that even Jewish-background believers in

Christ have a freedom from the Law which Paul will elaborate latter in the epistle Yet

Paulrsquos defence of his liberty has the Gentiles in view ndash v5 Gentile freedom from Law-

observance depends upon Jewish freedom from the same

In verse 6 Paul notes that the Jerusalem leaders added nothing additional to his gospel This

matches his purpose in coming to Jerusalem ndash to attest to the agreement in gospel

proclamation between his gospel and their gospel so that the unity of the gospel might be

established not so that Paulrsquos gospel might be approved Thus Paul defends both the

autonomy of his gospel and its congruity with the other apostlesrsquo message

Paulrsquos repeated disavowal of respect for status in these verses also deserves some

comment The δοκεῖν language should not be treated as suggesting insincerity as if Paul

were saying lsquothose who seemed to be something (but arenrsquot)rsquo This is an English connotation

to the language of lsquoseemingrsquo that does not apply in the Greek Paulrsquos point is probably rather

that being unacquainted with the Jerusalem church these were those who did indeed

appear to him to be important and proven leaders Yet he also makes the point that

lsquowhatever they were formerly matters nothing to mersquo The presence of the word ποτε

suggests that Paulrsquos disconcern for their status has more to do with their former way of life

indeed all our former ways of life than present reality His aside that πρόσωπον [ὁ] θεὸς

ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει draws from Dt 1017 with some minor alterations The concept is

prominent elsewhere in James in referring to Godrsquos impartiality

Verses 7-8 then concentrate on the difference between Paul and the Jerusalem leaders The

expressions τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας and τῆς περιτομῆς should be understood as the

receivers of that gospel proclamation so that Paulrsquos apostolate extends to the Gentiles

whereas Peterrsquos focuses on the Jews This division of mission fields is confirmed in v9 with

the right hand of fellowship given to Paul and Barnabas for their Gentile-mission work The

final comment of v10 may sound like an addition to Paulrsquos teachings but Paul emphasises

that it is already his own concern There is some debate about who lsquothe poorrsquo are whether

the marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the

poor in general as an expression of Christian faith In light of the ethical dimensions of later

Galatians I would suggest that it is the economically poor within the Christian community

and in light of the historical factors particularly those suffering in connection with the

Jerusalem church

211-21

Text 11 Ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν Κηφᾶς εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ ἀντέστην ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦνmiddot 12 πρὸ

τοῦ γὰρ ἐλθεῖν τινας ἀπὸ Ἰακώβου μετὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν συνήσθιενmiddot ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον ὑπέστελλεν καὶ

ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτόν φοβούμενος τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς 13 καὶ συνυπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ

Ἰουδαῖοι ὥστε καὶ Βαρναβᾶς συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει 14 ἀλλʼ ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ

ὀρθοποδοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ ἔμπροσθεν πάντωνmiddot Εἰ σὺ

Ἰουδαῖος ὑπάρχων ἐθνικῶς καὶ οὐκ Ἰουδαϊκῶς ζῇς πῶς τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις Ἰουδαΐζειν 15 Ἡμεῖς

φύσει Ἰουδαῖοι καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἐθνῶν ἁμαρτωλοί 16 εἰδότες δὲ ὅτι οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν ἵνα

δικαιωθῶμεν ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται

πᾶσα σάρξ 17 εἰ δὲ ζητοῦντες δικαιωθῆναι ἐν Χριστῷ εὑρέθημεν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἁμαρτωλοί ἆρα Χριστὸς

ἁμαρτίας διάκονος μὴ γένοιτοmiddot 18 εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομῶ παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν

συνιστάνω 19 ἐγὼ γὰρ διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον ἵνα θεῷ ζήσωmiddot Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαιmiddot 20 ζῶ δὲ

οὐκέτι ἐγώ ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστόςmiddot ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ

ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ 21 οὐκ ἀθετῶ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦmiddot εἰ γὰρ διὰ

νόμου δικαιοσύνη ἄρα Χριστὸς δωρεὰν ἀπέθανεν

Textual Criticism

12 τινας τινα ndash the manuscript support for the former is strong and diverse and the former

reading is more logical in the context

12 ἦλθον ἦλθεν ndash the manuscript support is slightly more even on this variation but the

former reading is preferable matching the τινας of the preceding

Translation

11 But when Kephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face because he was

condemned 12 for before the coming of certain men from Jacob he ate together with the

Gentiles but when they came he drew back and separated himself fearing those of the

Circumcision 13 and the remaining Jews joined him in hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was

led astray by their hypocrisy 14 But when I saw that they were not dealing straight in line

with the truth of the gospel I said to Kephas before all ldquoIf you being a Jew do not live in a

Jewish manner why do you compel the nations to Judaise 15 We by nature are Jews and

not sinners of the Nations 16 but knowing that a human being is not justified by the works

of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ even we believed in Christ Jesus so that we

might be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law because by the works of the

law all flesh will not be justified 17 But if we are found to be seeking to be justified in Christ

and are ourselves sinners then is Christ a servant of sin Not so 18 For I through the law

died to the law so that I might live to God I have been co-crucified with Christ 20 and I no

longer live but Christ lives in me what I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God

that loved me and gave himself on my behalf 21 I do not nullify the grace of God for if

through the law came righteousness then Christ died vainly

Comments

In verse 11 we have both the continuations of Paulrsquos temporally marked biographical

defence but also the introduction of a new sequence Peter comes to Antioch and there is

a division between Peter and Paul which Paul goes on to relate Paul gives the reason for his

strong opposition ndash Peter lsquowas condemnedrsquo This may be understood as lsquoPeter stood

condemnedrsquo by his actions Paul then explains the basis for Peterrsquos condemnation in verse

12 His former practice was to share table-fellowship to eat with the Gentile believes (with

lsquothe nationsrsquo) an action that Paul understands as being in line with the Gospel message

And indeed Peter does too based upon Acts at least Yet a new party comes to Antioch

lsquocertain men from Jacob (James)rsquo While Peter and James certainly represent a Christianity

more deeply embedded in Jewish cultural practices it is a mistake to overread this diversity

Debate continues about how we should understand the relationship between these men

and James himself Are they authorised Do they represent James and Jamesrsquo position Acts

15 suggests not On this basis I am inclined to see the party as a group associated with

Jamesrsquo more Jewish Christian practice but more conservative than James himself and not

an authorised delegation by any means They have some association with James and

represent themselves as coming from him

Paul makes Peterrsquos very separation a gospel-issue That is the basis of Paulrsquos condemnation

of Peter Not that eating with Jews or eating according to Jewish food laws is wrong But

that to do so in a context that separates oneself from Gentile believers carries a

communication that they do not have genuine fellowship together

So much so that verse 13 introduces the language of hypocrisy Peterrsquos actions are out of

line with his own beliefs No doubt that if questioned Peterrsquos response would be some kind

of accommodation-line The point here is that in seeking not to offend the Jewish faction

Peter is in fact undermining the gospel message by cutting off the Gentile believers

So Paul confronts Peter in v14 as he observes that there practice does not align with lsquothe

truth of the Gospelrsquo His question highlights Peterrsquos hypocrisy since Peter is a Jew and is

free from the Law and so regularly eats and lives like a Gentile how can he in fact force

Gentiles to live in a Jewish manner This is the outcome of Peterrsquos withdrawal ndash it sends the

message that Gentile believers will need to lsquoJudaisersquo in order to have full insider-status in

the new Christian movement Even though Peter himself makes no move to lsquocompelrsquo the

Gentiles his actions are tantamount to the same

It is unclear when the speech of Paul shifts from historical recollection of conversation with

Peter to epistolary discourse with the Galatians but it is certainly not before v15 The lsquowersquo

of v15 follows (or establishes if you prefer) the distinct referents of we vs you in the letter

We referring at least to Paul and Peter but by implication other Jewish-background

believers is used to distinguish Peter and Paul from lsquoGentile sinnersrsquo Paul asserts this as a

statement of who they are lsquoby naturersquo They were born as Jews and so were not unclean

Gentiles And yet even being such Jews Paul adds the participial phrase of v16 lsquoknowing

that a human being is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christrsquo

Paul here states the key theological principle that drives both his rebuke of Peter and his

argument within Galatians He draws upon Psalm 1432 with a shift from πᾶς ζῶν to πᾶσα

σάρξ but more importantly adds ἐξ ἔργων νόμου The future tense δικαιωθήσεται may

refer to a decisively eschatological justification rather than a generic one This will have

important theological implications

Immediately then we enter into two significant debates The first is concerning the phrase ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου works of the Law For my part I am unpersuaded by the arguments of the NPP

to understand this as something like lsquoJewish boundary markers of ethno-religious identityrsquo

It certainly fails to function that way in Galatians Neither should it be pushed to a generic

lsquolegalismrsquo Rather it expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant context which

appears to be what the Judaising-teachers in Galatia are pushing for

The second is debate over the meaning of lsquorighteousnessrsquo and lsquojustifyrsquo language Again I find

the NPP unpersuasive That a la Wright justification should be redefined in largely

covenant-inclusion terms seems to make a nonsense of justification language at all I stand

with a traditional stream that sees lsquoto justifyrsquo to have legal connotations and to include the

idea of declaring and so performatively making right More on this to come

v16 then expresses Paulrsquos conviction from the scriptures that a human being is not (and

cannot) be right before God through obedience to the Law but can be so justified can be so

right through faith in Jesus Christ (In some instances I suppose one might take lsquofaith of

Jesus Christrsquo to refer to Jesusrsquo faithfulness but I find this position also unconvincing) The

fact that Peter and Paul both know this is why they as Jews trusted in Christ ndash there was

no salvation for them through the (works of the) Law Paul is triply emphatic here he first

declares what lsquowersquo (Jewish believers) know [justification through faith not works of law]

then declares that they believed in Christ so that [justification through faith not works of

law] because [justification through faith not works of law] Peter and Paul are in agreement

that one has to stop lsquodoingrsquo the Law

In v17 Paul raises the question if as believers in Christ and no longer Law-observers we are

lsquosinnersrsquo in that same old covenant sense that Paul raises back in v15 does this in fact make

the Messiah a servant or minister of sin Paulrsquos emphatic μὴ γένοιτο not only rules this out

but is an expression of its absurdity v18 gives the reason lsquoSinnerrsquo in the lsquoGentile sinnerrsquo

sense is an empty term ndash itrsquos been robbed of its meaning by the coming of the new

covenantal reality Rather to go back to the Law to the old covenantal reality would in fact

make Paul a transgressor In re-establishing the Law as a principle for life and obedience

before God the inevitable outcome is sin by the standard of the Law and so condemnation

by the Law Implicit in Paulrsquos argument is that Peterrsquos choice to withdraw from Gentile

company and meals is based on an observance of the Law not only not necessary any more

but in fact a return to it undoes and undermines the Gospel freedom that faith in Christ

brings

The final three verses shift to a very personal note as Paul relates his own salvific existential

reality The Law was the means of Paulrsquos death insofar as he was condemned by the Law

because the Law is a mechanism of death The Law produces neither righteousness nor life

with respect to God It isnrsquot designed to do so And yet Paulrsquos death to Law through Law is

the means for life ndash only through dying to the Law can the Jewish Paul live unto God Paul

immediately links such Law-death to the crucifixion Paulrsquos co-crucifixion with Christ is his

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

traditions as lsquofaithsrsquo is to import a key Christian distinctive into them that is not necessarily

present So Paul can speak of preaching the Faith in a unique sense of the word This

section 111-24 repeatedly hammers the defence of the source of Paulrsquos gospel and Paulrsquos

apostleship

21-10

Text 21 Ἔπειτα διὰ δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν πάλιν ἀνέβην εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα μετὰ Βαρναβᾶ συμπαραλαβὼν καὶ

Τίτονmiddot 2 ἀνέβην δὲ κατὰ ἀποκάλυψινmiddot καὶ ἀνεθέμην αὐτοῖς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ κηρύσσω ἐν τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν κατʼ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς δοκοῦσιν μή πως εἰς κενὸν τρέχω ἢ ἔδραμον 3 ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ Τίτος ὁ σὺν

ἐμοί Ἕλλην ὤν ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναιmiddot 4 διὰ δὲ τοὺς παρεισάκτους ψευδαδέλφους οἵτινες

παρεισῆλθον κατασκοπῆσαι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ἡμῶν ἣν ἔχομεν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα ἡμᾶς

καταδουλώσουσινmdash 5 οἷς οὐδὲ πρὸς ὥραν εἴξαμεν τῇ ὑποταγῇ ἵνα ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίου

διαμείνῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς 6 ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τιmdash ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι διαφέρειmiddot

πρόσωπον θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνειmdash ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο 7 ἀλλὰ

τοὐναντίον ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς 8

ὁ γὰρ ἐνεργήσας Πέτρῳ εἰς ἀποστολὴν τῆς περιτομῆς ἐνήργησεν καὶ ἐμοὶ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη 9 καὶ γνόντες

τὴν χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι Ἰάκωβος καὶ Κηφᾶς καὶ Ἰωάννης οἱ δοκοῦντες στῦλοι εἶναι δεξιὰς

ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρναβᾷ κοινωνίας ἵνα ἡμεῖς εἰς τὰ ἔθνη αὐτοὶ δὲ εἰς τὴν περιτομήνmiddot 10 μόνον τῶν

πτωχῶν ἵνα μνημονεύωμεν ὃ καὶ ἐσπούδασα αὐτὸ τοῦτο ποιῆσαι5

Textual Criticism

πάλιν ἀνέβην in v1 has both early and diverse attestation The reverse order is supported by

mainly Western texts In any case the significance would be virtually zero

In v5 several texts omit οἷς which grammatically smooths the text omission of οὐδέ on the

other hand might harmonise Paulrsquos yielding with Act 163 (so Metzger conjectures) but

would run directly contrary to Paulrsquos Galatian argument

v9 the reading of the names is altered in some texts with the more familiar Πέτρος

substituted for Κηφᾶς and brought to the front for prominence

Translation

1 Then after 14 years I again went up to Jerusalem taking with me Barnabas and Titus 2 I

went up in accordance with a revelation and I presented to them the gospel which I preach

among the nations privately to those that seemed good lest somehow I am running or

have run in vain 3 but not even Titus who was with me being a Greek was compelled to be

circumcised 4 now on account of the snuck-in pseudo-brothers who snuck in to spy out our

liberty which we have in Christ Jesus that they might enslave us 5 to whom not even for an

hour did we yield to subjugation so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you

6 But from those that seemed to be something ndash whatever they were formerly matters

nothing to me (God does not judge men at face-value) ndash for those who seemed to be

5 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 2

regarded added nothing to me 7 but rather seeing that I have been entrusted with the

gospel of the uncircumcision just as Peter of the uncircumcision 8 for the One operating

through Peter for the apostolate of the uncircumcised worked also through me to the

nations 9 and knowing the grace that was given to me Jacob and Kephas and John those

seeming to be pillars gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship so that we unto

the nations and they unto the circumcision 10 only that we should remember the poor6

which this very thing I was eager to do

Comments

The temporal sequencing of Paulrsquos autobiographical material continues with the initial

Ἔπειτα The 14 year gap between Paulrsquos first initial visit and this second visit again confirms

Paulrsquos autonomous gospel ministry Commentators divide over whether this visit accords

with Acts 15 Acts 11 or another occasion altogether Given that the council in Acts 15

provides a clear statement of Gentile law-observance it seems odd that Paul would not cite

nor bring that letter to bear on the Galatian scenario if this visit coincided with the Acts 15

narrative For this reason I am inclined to see this visit as either corresponding to the Acts 11

visit or another unspecified visit to Jerusalem

Paul cites three different reasons for his visit to Jerusalem on this occasion Firstly it is in

accordance with a revelation Paul does not identify whether this revelation in particular

was given to him directly In any case it grounds Paulrsquos movements in Godrsquos activity and

purpose Secondly he presents to lsquothemrsquo his gospel in conjunction with the third reason to

ensure his gospel work wasnrsquot in vain

Understandably it can seem that Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel to the Jerusalem leaders

is to gain their approval but broader considerations render this unlikely Paul has been

arguing for the God-revealed autonomous nature of his gospel He doesnrsquot personally need

the Jerusalem leadersrsquo approval or blessing No rather Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel is to

confirm the unity of his gospel with the Jerusalem leaders the Jewish-apostolate and so to

reject claims that Paulrsquos gospel work was half-done which left open a path for his Judaising

opponents to sneak in and lsquocompletersquo Paulrsquos gospel work

At this point attention to pronouns becomes more necessary I think a good case can be

maintained that the language of lsquowersquo throughout most of Galatians refers to Jewish-

background believers in Christ while lsquoyoursquo has in view Gentile-background believers ie the

Galatians So Paul notes that Titus though a Greek was not compelled to be circumcised

The Jerusalem church did not require entrance and observance of Torah from a Gentile-

believer

The grammar of 4-6 is somewhat discontinuous All of verse 4 prepares for verse 5 so that

Paulrsquos refusal to yield is the main concept The false-brothers of verse 4 are the Jerusalem

6 Who are the poor The marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the poor in general which is an expression of Christian faith

counterparts to the opponents in Galatia ndash Judaising believers who seek Torah-observance

The lsquoour libertyrsquo in v4 refers to the very liberty that even Jewish-background believers in

Christ have a freedom from the Law which Paul will elaborate latter in the epistle Yet

Paulrsquos defence of his liberty has the Gentiles in view ndash v5 Gentile freedom from Law-

observance depends upon Jewish freedom from the same

In verse 6 Paul notes that the Jerusalem leaders added nothing additional to his gospel This

matches his purpose in coming to Jerusalem ndash to attest to the agreement in gospel

proclamation between his gospel and their gospel so that the unity of the gospel might be

established not so that Paulrsquos gospel might be approved Thus Paul defends both the

autonomy of his gospel and its congruity with the other apostlesrsquo message

Paulrsquos repeated disavowal of respect for status in these verses also deserves some

comment The δοκεῖν language should not be treated as suggesting insincerity as if Paul

were saying lsquothose who seemed to be something (but arenrsquot)rsquo This is an English connotation

to the language of lsquoseemingrsquo that does not apply in the Greek Paulrsquos point is probably rather

that being unacquainted with the Jerusalem church these were those who did indeed

appear to him to be important and proven leaders Yet he also makes the point that

lsquowhatever they were formerly matters nothing to mersquo The presence of the word ποτε

suggests that Paulrsquos disconcern for their status has more to do with their former way of life

indeed all our former ways of life than present reality His aside that πρόσωπον [ὁ] θεὸς

ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει draws from Dt 1017 with some minor alterations The concept is

prominent elsewhere in James in referring to Godrsquos impartiality

Verses 7-8 then concentrate on the difference between Paul and the Jerusalem leaders The

expressions τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας and τῆς περιτομῆς should be understood as the

receivers of that gospel proclamation so that Paulrsquos apostolate extends to the Gentiles

whereas Peterrsquos focuses on the Jews This division of mission fields is confirmed in v9 with

the right hand of fellowship given to Paul and Barnabas for their Gentile-mission work The

final comment of v10 may sound like an addition to Paulrsquos teachings but Paul emphasises

that it is already his own concern There is some debate about who lsquothe poorrsquo are whether

the marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the

poor in general as an expression of Christian faith In light of the ethical dimensions of later

Galatians I would suggest that it is the economically poor within the Christian community

and in light of the historical factors particularly those suffering in connection with the

Jerusalem church

211-21

Text 11 Ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν Κηφᾶς εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ ἀντέστην ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦνmiddot 12 πρὸ

τοῦ γὰρ ἐλθεῖν τινας ἀπὸ Ἰακώβου μετὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν συνήσθιενmiddot ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον ὑπέστελλεν καὶ

ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτόν φοβούμενος τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς 13 καὶ συνυπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ

Ἰουδαῖοι ὥστε καὶ Βαρναβᾶς συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει 14 ἀλλʼ ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ

ὀρθοποδοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ ἔμπροσθεν πάντωνmiddot Εἰ σὺ

Ἰουδαῖος ὑπάρχων ἐθνικῶς καὶ οὐκ Ἰουδαϊκῶς ζῇς πῶς τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις Ἰουδαΐζειν 15 Ἡμεῖς

φύσει Ἰουδαῖοι καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἐθνῶν ἁμαρτωλοί 16 εἰδότες δὲ ὅτι οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν ἵνα

δικαιωθῶμεν ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται

πᾶσα σάρξ 17 εἰ δὲ ζητοῦντες δικαιωθῆναι ἐν Χριστῷ εὑρέθημεν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἁμαρτωλοί ἆρα Χριστὸς

ἁμαρτίας διάκονος μὴ γένοιτοmiddot 18 εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομῶ παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν

συνιστάνω 19 ἐγὼ γὰρ διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον ἵνα θεῷ ζήσωmiddot Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαιmiddot 20 ζῶ δὲ

οὐκέτι ἐγώ ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστόςmiddot ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ

ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ 21 οὐκ ἀθετῶ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦmiddot εἰ γὰρ διὰ

νόμου δικαιοσύνη ἄρα Χριστὸς δωρεὰν ἀπέθανεν

Textual Criticism

12 τινας τινα ndash the manuscript support for the former is strong and diverse and the former

reading is more logical in the context

12 ἦλθον ἦλθεν ndash the manuscript support is slightly more even on this variation but the

former reading is preferable matching the τινας of the preceding

Translation

11 But when Kephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face because he was

condemned 12 for before the coming of certain men from Jacob he ate together with the

Gentiles but when they came he drew back and separated himself fearing those of the

Circumcision 13 and the remaining Jews joined him in hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was

led astray by their hypocrisy 14 But when I saw that they were not dealing straight in line

with the truth of the gospel I said to Kephas before all ldquoIf you being a Jew do not live in a

Jewish manner why do you compel the nations to Judaise 15 We by nature are Jews and

not sinners of the Nations 16 but knowing that a human being is not justified by the works

of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ even we believed in Christ Jesus so that we

might be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law because by the works of the

law all flesh will not be justified 17 But if we are found to be seeking to be justified in Christ

and are ourselves sinners then is Christ a servant of sin Not so 18 For I through the law

died to the law so that I might live to God I have been co-crucified with Christ 20 and I no

longer live but Christ lives in me what I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God

that loved me and gave himself on my behalf 21 I do not nullify the grace of God for if

through the law came righteousness then Christ died vainly

Comments

In verse 11 we have both the continuations of Paulrsquos temporally marked biographical

defence but also the introduction of a new sequence Peter comes to Antioch and there is

a division between Peter and Paul which Paul goes on to relate Paul gives the reason for his

strong opposition ndash Peter lsquowas condemnedrsquo This may be understood as lsquoPeter stood

condemnedrsquo by his actions Paul then explains the basis for Peterrsquos condemnation in verse

12 His former practice was to share table-fellowship to eat with the Gentile believes (with

lsquothe nationsrsquo) an action that Paul understands as being in line with the Gospel message

And indeed Peter does too based upon Acts at least Yet a new party comes to Antioch

lsquocertain men from Jacob (James)rsquo While Peter and James certainly represent a Christianity

more deeply embedded in Jewish cultural practices it is a mistake to overread this diversity

Debate continues about how we should understand the relationship between these men

and James himself Are they authorised Do they represent James and Jamesrsquo position Acts

15 suggests not On this basis I am inclined to see the party as a group associated with

Jamesrsquo more Jewish Christian practice but more conservative than James himself and not

an authorised delegation by any means They have some association with James and

represent themselves as coming from him

Paul makes Peterrsquos very separation a gospel-issue That is the basis of Paulrsquos condemnation

of Peter Not that eating with Jews or eating according to Jewish food laws is wrong But

that to do so in a context that separates oneself from Gentile believers carries a

communication that they do not have genuine fellowship together

So much so that verse 13 introduces the language of hypocrisy Peterrsquos actions are out of

line with his own beliefs No doubt that if questioned Peterrsquos response would be some kind

of accommodation-line The point here is that in seeking not to offend the Jewish faction

Peter is in fact undermining the gospel message by cutting off the Gentile believers

So Paul confronts Peter in v14 as he observes that there practice does not align with lsquothe

truth of the Gospelrsquo His question highlights Peterrsquos hypocrisy since Peter is a Jew and is

free from the Law and so regularly eats and lives like a Gentile how can he in fact force

Gentiles to live in a Jewish manner This is the outcome of Peterrsquos withdrawal ndash it sends the

message that Gentile believers will need to lsquoJudaisersquo in order to have full insider-status in

the new Christian movement Even though Peter himself makes no move to lsquocompelrsquo the

Gentiles his actions are tantamount to the same

It is unclear when the speech of Paul shifts from historical recollection of conversation with

Peter to epistolary discourse with the Galatians but it is certainly not before v15 The lsquowersquo

of v15 follows (or establishes if you prefer) the distinct referents of we vs you in the letter

We referring at least to Paul and Peter but by implication other Jewish-background

believers is used to distinguish Peter and Paul from lsquoGentile sinnersrsquo Paul asserts this as a

statement of who they are lsquoby naturersquo They were born as Jews and so were not unclean

Gentiles And yet even being such Jews Paul adds the participial phrase of v16 lsquoknowing

that a human being is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christrsquo

Paul here states the key theological principle that drives both his rebuke of Peter and his

argument within Galatians He draws upon Psalm 1432 with a shift from πᾶς ζῶν to πᾶσα

σάρξ but more importantly adds ἐξ ἔργων νόμου The future tense δικαιωθήσεται may

refer to a decisively eschatological justification rather than a generic one This will have

important theological implications

Immediately then we enter into two significant debates The first is concerning the phrase ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου works of the Law For my part I am unpersuaded by the arguments of the NPP

to understand this as something like lsquoJewish boundary markers of ethno-religious identityrsquo

It certainly fails to function that way in Galatians Neither should it be pushed to a generic

lsquolegalismrsquo Rather it expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant context which

appears to be what the Judaising-teachers in Galatia are pushing for

The second is debate over the meaning of lsquorighteousnessrsquo and lsquojustifyrsquo language Again I find

the NPP unpersuasive That a la Wright justification should be redefined in largely

covenant-inclusion terms seems to make a nonsense of justification language at all I stand

with a traditional stream that sees lsquoto justifyrsquo to have legal connotations and to include the

idea of declaring and so performatively making right More on this to come

v16 then expresses Paulrsquos conviction from the scriptures that a human being is not (and

cannot) be right before God through obedience to the Law but can be so justified can be so

right through faith in Jesus Christ (In some instances I suppose one might take lsquofaith of

Jesus Christrsquo to refer to Jesusrsquo faithfulness but I find this position also unconvincing) The

fact that Peter and Paul both know this is why they as Jews trusted in Christ ndash there was

no salvation for them through the (works of the) Law Paul is triply emphatic here he first

declares what lsquowersquo (Jewish believers) know [justification through faith not works of law]

then declares that they believed in Christ so that [justification through faith not works of

law] because [justification through faith not works of law] Peter and Paul are in agreement

that one has to stop lsquodoingrsquo the Law

In v17 Paul raises the question if as believers in Christ and no longer Law-observers we are

lsquosinnersrsquo in that same old covenant sense that Paul raises back in v15 does this in fact make

the Messiah a servant or minister of sin Paulrsquos emphatic μὴ γένοιτο not only rules this out

but is an expression of its absurdity v18 gives the reason lsquoSinnerrsquo in the lsquoGentile sinnerrsquo

sense is an empty term ndash itrsquos been robbed of its meaning by the coming of the new

covenantal reality Rather to go back to the Law to the old covenantal reality would in fact

make Paul a transgressor In re-establishing the Law as a principle for life and obedience

before God the inevitable outcome is sin by the standard of the Law and so condemnation

by the Law Implicit in Paulrsquos argument is that Peterrsquos choice to withdraw from Gentile

company and meals is based on an observance of the Law not only not necessary any more

but in fact a return to it undoes and undermines the Gospel freedom that faith in Christ

brings

The final three verses shift to a very personal note as Paul relates his own salvific existential

reality The Law was the means of Paulrsquos death insofar as he was condemned by the Law

because the Law is a mechanism of death The Law produces neither righteousness nor life

with respect to God It isnrsquot designed to do so And yet Paulrsquos death to Law through Law is

the means for life ndash only through dying to the Law can the Jewish Paul live unto God Paul

immediately links such Law-death to the crucifixion Paulrsquos co-crucifixion with Christ is his

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

regarded added nothing to me 7 but rather seeing that I have been entrusted with the

gospel of the uncircumcision just as Peter of the uncircumcision 8 for the One operating

through Peter for the apostolate of the uncircumcised worked also through me to the

nations 9 and knowing the grace that was given to me Jacob and Kephas and John those

seeming to be pillars gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship so that we unto

the nations and they unto the circumcision 10 only that we should remember the poor6

which this very thing I was eager to do

Comments

The temporal sequencing of Paulrsquos autobiographical material continues with the initial

Ἔπειτα The 14 year gap between Paulrsquos first initial visit and this second visit again confirms

Paulrsquos autonomous gospel ministry Commentators divide over whether this visit accords

with Acts 15 Acts 11 or another occasion altogether Given that the council in Acts 15

provides a clear statement of Gentile law-observance it seems odd that Paul would not cite

nor bring that letter to bear on the Galatian scenario if this visit coincided with the Acts 15

narrative For this reason I am inclined to see this visit as either corresponding to the Acts 11

visit or another unspecified visit to Jerusalem

Paul cites three different reasons for his visit to Jerusalem on this occasion Firstly it is in

accordance with a revelation Paul does not identify whether this revelation in particular

was given to him directly In any case it grounds Paulrsquos movements in Godrsquos activity and

purpose Secondly he presents to lsquothemrsquo his gospel in conjunction with the third reason to

ensure his gospel work wasnrsquot in vain

Understandably it can seem that Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel to the Jerusalem leaders

is to gain their approval but broader considerations render this unlikely Paul has been

arguing for the God-revealed autonomous nature of his gospel He doesnrsquot personally need

the Jerusalem leadersrsquo approval or blessing No rather Paulrsquos presentation of his gospel is to

confirm the unity of his gospel with the Jerusalem leaders the Jewish-apostolate and so to

reject claims that Paulrsquos gospel work was half-done which left open a path for his Judaising

opponents to sneak in and lsquocompletersquo Paulrsquos gospel work

At this point attention to pronouns becomes more necessary I think a good case can be

maintained that the language of lsquowersquo throughout most of Galatians refers to Jewish-

background believers in Christ while lsquoyoursquo has in view Gentile-background believers ie the

Galatians So Paul notes that Titus though a Greek was not compelled to be circumcised

The Jerusalem church did not require entrance and observance of Torah from a Gentile-

believer

The grammar of 4-6 is somewhat discontinuous All of verse 4 prepares for verse 5 so that

Paulrsquos refusal to yield is the main concept The false-brothers of verse 4 are the Jerusalem

6 Who are the poor The marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the poor in general which is an expression of Christian faith

counterparts to the opponents in Galatia ndash Judaising believers who seek Torah-observance

The lsquoour libertyrsquo in v4 refers to the very liberty that even Jewish-background believers in

Christ have a freedom from the Law which Paul will elaborate latter in the epistle Yet

Paulrsquos defence of his liberty has the Gentiles in view ndash v5 Gentile freedom from Law-

observance depends upon Jewish freedom from the same

In verse 6 Paul notes that the Jerusalem leaders added nothing additional to his gospel This

matches his purpose in coming to Jerusalem ndash to attest to the agreement in gospel

proclamation between his gospel and their gospel so that the unity of the gospel might be

established not so that Paulrsquos gospel might be approved Thus Paul defends both the

autonomy of his gospel and its congruity with the other apostlesrsquo message

Paulrsquos repeated disavowal of respect for status in these verses also deserves some

comment The δοκεῖν language should not be treated as suggesting insincerity as if Paul

were saying lsquothose who seemed to be something (but arenrsquot)rsquo This is an English connotation

to the language of lsquoseemingrsquo that does not apply in the Greek Paulrsquos point is probably rather

that being unacquainted with the Jerusalem church these were those who did indeed

appear to him to be important and proven leaders Yet he also makes the point that

lsquowhatever they were formerly matters nothing to mersquo The presence of the word ποτε

suggests that Paulrsquos disconcern for their status has more to do with their former way of life

indeed all our former ways of life than present reality His aside that πρόσωπον [ὁ] θεὸς

ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει draws from Dt 1017 with some minor alterations The concept is

prominent elsewhere in James in referring to Godrsquos impartiality

Verses 7-8 then concentrate on the difference between Paul and the Jerusalem leaders The

expressions τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας and τῆς περιτομῆς should be understood as the

receivers of that gospel proclamation so that Paulrsquos apostolate extends to the Gentiles

whereas Peterrsquos focuses on the Jews This division of mission fields is confirmed in v9 with

the right hand of fellowship given to Paul and Barnabas for their Gentile-mission work The

final comment of v10 may sound like an addition to Paulrsquos teachings but Paul emphasises

that it is already his own concern There is some debate about who lsquothe poorrsquo are whether

the marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the

poor in general as an expression of Christian faith In light of the ethical dimensions of later

Galatians I would suggest that it is the economically poor within the Christian community

and in light of the historical factors particularly those suffering in connection with the

Jerusalem church

211-21

Text 11 Ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν Κηφᾶς εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ ἀντέστην ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦνmiddot 12 πρὸ

τοῦ γὰρ ἐλθεῖν τινας ἀπὸ Ἰακώβου μετὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν συνήσθιενmiddot ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον ὑπέστελλεν καὶ

ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτόν φοβούμενος τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς 13 καὶ συνυπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ

Ἰουδαῖοι ὥστε καὶ Βαρναβᾶς συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει 14 ἀλλʼ ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ

ὀρθοποδοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ ἔμπροσθεν πάντωνmiddot Εἰ σὺ

Ἰουδαῖος ὑπάρχων ἐθνικῶς καὶ οὐκ Ἰουδαϊκῶς ζῇς πῶς τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις Ἰουδαΐζειν 15 Ἡμεῖς

φύσει Ἰουδαῖοι καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἐθνῶν ἁμαρτωλοί 16 εἰδότες δὲ ὅτι οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν ἵνα

δικαιωθῶμεν ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται

πᾶσα σάρξ 17 εἰ δὲ ζητοῦντες δικαιωθῆναι ἐν Χριστῷ εὑρέθημεν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἁμαρτωλοί ἆρα Χριστὸς

ἁμαρτίας διάκονος μὴ γένοιτοmiddot 18 εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομῶ παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν

συνιστάνω 19 ἐγὼ γὰρ διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον ἵνα θεῷ ζήσωmiddot Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαιmiddot 20 ζῶ δὲ

οὐκέτι ἐγώ ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστόςmiddot ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ

ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ 21 οὐκ ἀθετῶ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦmiddot εἰ γὰρ διὰ

νόμου δικαιοσύνη ἄρα Χριστὸς δωρεὰν ἀπέθανεν

Textual Criticism

12 τινας τινα ndash the manuscript support for the former is strong and diverse and the former

reading is more logical in the context

12 ἦλθον ἦλθεν ndash the manuscript support is slightly more even on this variation but the

former reading is preferable matching the τινας of the preceding

Translation

11 But when Kephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face because he was

condemned 12 for before the coming of certain men from Jacob he ate together with the

Gentiles but when they came he drew back and separated himself fearing those of the

Circumcision 13 and the remaining Jews joined him in hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was

led astray by their hypocrisy 14 But when I saw that they were not dealing straight in line

with the truth of the gospel I said to Kephas before all ldquoIf you being a Jew do not live in a

Jewish manner why do you compel the nations to Judaise 15 We by nature are Jews and

not sinners of the Nations 16 but knowing that a human being is not justified by the works

of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ even we believed in Christ Jesus so that we

might be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law because by the works of the

law all flesh will not be justified 17 But if we are found to be seeking to be justified in Christ

and are ourselves sinners then is Christ a servant of sin Not so 18 For I through the law

died to the law so that I might live to God I have been co-crucified with Christ 20 and I no

longer live but Christ lives in me what I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God

that loved me and gave himself on my behalf 21 I do not nullify the grace of God for if

through the law came righteousness then Christ died vainly

Comments

In verse 11 we have both the continuations of Paulrsquos temporally marked biographical

defence but also the introduction of a new sequence Peter comes to Antioch and there is

a division between Peter and Paul which Paul goes on to relate Paul gives the reason for his

strong opposition ndash Peter lsquowas condemnedrsquo This may be understood as lsquoPeter stood

condemnedrsquo by his actions Paul then explains the basis for Peterrsquos condemnation in verse

12 His former practice was to share table-fellowship to eat with the Gentile believes (with

lsquothe nationsrsquo) an action that Paul understands as being in line with the Gospel message

And indeed Peter does too based upon Acts at least Yet a new party comes to Antioch

lsquocertain men from Jacob (James)rsquo While Peter and James certainly represent a Christianity

more deeply embedded in Jewish cultural practices it is a mistake to overread this diversity

Debate continues about how we should understand the relationship between these men

and James himself Are they authorised Do they represent James and Jamesrsquo position Acts

15 suggests not On this basis I am inclined to see the party as a group associated with

Jamesrsquo more Jewish Christian practice but more conservative than James himself and not

an authorised delegation by any means They have some association with James and

represent themselves as coming from him

Paul makes Peterrsquos very separation a gospel-issue That is the basis of Paulrsquos condemnation

of Peter Not that eating with Jews or eating according to Jewish food laws is wrong But

that to do so in a context that separates oneself from Gentile believers carries a

communication that they do not have genuine fellowship together

So much so that verse 13 introduces the language of hypocrisy Peterrsquos actions are out of

line with his own beliefs No doubt that if questioned Peterrsquos response would be some kind

of accommodation-line The point here is that in seeking not to offend the Jewish faction

Peter is in fact undermining the gospel message by cutting off the Gentile believers

So Paul confronts Peter in v14 as he observes that there practice does not align with lsquothe

truth of the Gospelrsquo His question highlights Peterrsquos hypocrisy since Peter is a Jew and is

free from the Law and so regularly eats and lives like a Gentile how can he in fact force

Gentiles to live in a Jewish manner This is the outcome of Peterrsquos withdrawal ndash it sends the

message that Gentile believers will need to lsquoJudaisersquo in order to have full insider-status in

the new Christian movement Even though Peter himself makes no move to lsquocompelrsquo the

Gentiles his actions are tantamount to the same

It is unclear when the speech of Paul shifts from historical recollection of conversation with

Peter to epistolary discourse with the Galatians but it is certainly not before v15 The lsquowersquo

of v15 follows (or establishes if you prefer) the distinct referents of we vs you in the letter

We referring at least to Paul and Peter but by implication other Jewish-background

believers is used to distinguish Peter and Paul from lsquoGentile sinnersrsquo Paul asserts this as a

statement of who they are lsquoby naturersquo They were born as Jews and so were not unclean

Gentiles And yet even being such Jews Paul adds the participial phrase of v16 lsquoknowing

that a human being is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christrsquo

Paul here states the key theological principle that drives both his rebuke of Peter and his

argument within Galatians He draws upon Psalm 1432 with a shift from πᾶς ζῶν to πᾶσα

σάρξ but more importantly adds ἐξ ἔργων νόμου The future tense δικαιωθήσεται may

refer to a decisively eschatological justification rather than a generic one This will have

important theological implications

Immediately then we enter into two significant debates The first is concerning the phrase ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου works of the Law For my part I am unpersuaded by the arguments of the NPP

to understand this as something like lsquoJewish boundary markers of ethno-religious identityrsquo

It certainly fails to function that way in Galatians Neither should it be pushed to a generic

lsquolegalismrsquo Rather it expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant context which

appears to be what the Judaising-teachers in Galatia are pushing for

The second is debate over the meaning of lsquorighteousnessrsquo and lsquojustifyrsquo language Again I find

the NPP unpersuasive That a la Wright justification should be redefined in largely

covenant-inclusion terms seems to make a nonsense of justification language at all I stand

with a traditional stream that sees lsquoto justifyrsquo to have legal connotations and to include the

idea of declaring and so performatively making right More on this to come

v16 then expresses Paulrsquos conviction from the scriptures that a human being is not (and

cannot) be right before God through obedience to the Law but can be so justified can be so

right through faith in Jesus Christ (In some instances I suppose one might take lsquofaith of

Jesus Christrsquo to refer to Jesusrsquo faithfulness but I find this position also unconvincing) The

fact that Peter and Paul both know this is why they as Jews trusted in Christ ndash there was

no salvation for them through the (works of the) Law Paul is triply emphatic here he first

declares what lsquowersquo (Jewish believers) know [justification through faith not works of law]

then declares that they believed in Christ so that [justification through faith not works of

law] because [justification through faith not works of law] Peter and Paul are in agreement

that one has to stop lsquodoingrsquo the Law

In v17 Paul raises the question if as believers in Christ and no longer Law-observers we are

lsquosinnersrsquo in that same old covenant sense that Paul raises back in v15 does this in fact make

the Messiah a servant or minister of sin Paulrsquos emphatic μὴ γένοιτο not only rules this out

but is an expression of its absurdity v18 gives the reason lsquoSinnerrsquo in the lsquoGentile sinnerrsquo

sense is an empty term ndash itrsquos been robbed of its meaning by the coming of the new

covenantal reality Rather to go back to the Law to the old covenantal reality would in fact

make Paul a transgressor In re-establishing the Law as a principle for life and obedience

before God the inevitable outcome is sin by the standard of the Law and so condemnation

by the Law Implicit in Paulrsquos argument is that Peterrsquos choice to withdraw from Gentile

company and meals is based on an observance of the Law not only not necessary any more

but in fact a return to it undoes and undermines the Gospel freedom that faith in Christ

brings

The final three verses shift to a very personal note as Paul relates his own salvific existential

reality The Law was the means of Paulrsquos death insofar as he was condemned by the Law

because the Law is a mechanism of death The Law produces neither righteousness nor life

with respect to God It isnrsquot designed to do so And yet Paulrsquos death to Law through Law is

the means for life ndash only through dying to the Law can the Jewish Paul live unto God Paul

immediately links such Law-death to the crucifixion Paulrsquos co-crucifixion with Christ is his

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

counterparts to the opponents in Galatia ndash Judaising believers who seek Torah-observance

The lsquoour libertyrsquo in v4 refers to the very liberty that even Jewish-background believers in

Christ have a freedom from the Law which Paul will elaborate latter in the epistle Yet

Paulrsquos defence of his liberty has the Gentiles in view ndash v5 Gentile freedom from Law-

observance depends upon Jewish freedom from the same

In verse 6 Paul notes that the Jerusalem leaders added nothing additional to his gospel This

matches his purpose in coming to Jerusalem ndash to attest to the agreement in gospel

proclamation between his gospel and their gospel so that the unity of the gospel might be

established not so that Paulrsquos gospel might be approved Thus Paul defends both the

autonomy of his gospel and its congruity with the other apostlesrsquo message

Paulrsquos repeated disavowal of respect for status in these verses also deserves some

comment The δοκεῖν language should not be treated as suggesting insincerity as if Paul

were saying lsquothose who seemed to be something (but arenrsquot)rsquo This is an English connotation

to the language of lsquoseemingrsquo that does not apply in the Greek Paulrsquos point is probably rather

that being unacquainted with the Jerusalem church these were those who did indeed

appear to him to be important and proven leaders Yet he also makes the point that

lsquowhatever they were formerly matters nothing to mersquo The presence of the word ποτε

suggests that Paulrsquos disconcern for their status has more to do with their former way of life

indeed all our former ways of life than present reality His aside that πρόσωπον [ὁ] θεὸς

ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει draws from Dt 1017 with some minor alterations The concept is

prominent elsewhere in James in referring to Godrsquos impartiality

Verses 7-8 then concentrate on the difference between Paul and the Jerusalem leaders The

expressions τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας and τῆς περιτομῆς should be understood as the

receivers of that gospel proclamation so that Paulrsquos apostolate extends to the Gentiles

whereas Peterrsquos focuses on the Jews This division of mission fields is confirmed in v9 with

the right hand of fellowship given to Paul and Barnabas for their Gentile-mission work The

final comment of v10 may sound like an addition to Paulrsquos teachings but Paul emphasises

that it is already his own concern There is some debate about who lsquothe poorrsquo are whether

the marginalised in Jewish society or the economic sufferers in the Jerusalem church or the

poor in general as an expression of Christian faith In light of the ethical dimensions of later

Galatians I would suggest that it is the economically poor within the Christian community

and in light of the historical factors particularly those suffering in connection with the

Jerusalem church

211-21

Text 11 Ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν Κηφᾶς εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ ἀντέστην ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦνmiddot 12 πρὸ

τοῦ γὰρ ἐλθεῖν τινας ἀπὸ Ἰακώβου μετὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν συνήσθιενmiddot ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον ὑπέστελλεν καὶ

ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτόν φοβούμενος τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς 13 καὶ συνυπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ

Ἰουδαῖοι ὥστε καὶ Βαρναβᾶς συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει 14 ἀλλʼ ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ

ὀρθοποδοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ ἔμπροσθεν πάντωνmiddot Εἰ σὺ

Ἰουδαῖος ὑπάρχων ἐθνικῶς καὶ οὐκ Ἰουδαϊκῶς ζῇς πῶς τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις Ἰουδαΐζειν 15 Ἡμεῖς

φύσει Ἰουδαῖοι καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἐθνῶν ἁμαρτωλοί 16 εἰδότες δὲ ὅτι οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν ἵνα

δικαιωθῶμεν ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται

πᾶσα σάρξ 17 εἰ δὲ ζητοῦντες δικαιωθῆναι ἐν Χριστῷ εὑρέθημεν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἁμαρτωλοί ἆρα Χριστὸς

ἁμαρτίας διάκονος μὴ γένοιτοmiddot 18 εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομῶ παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν

συνιστάνω 19 ἐγὼ γὰρ διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον ἵνα θεῷ ζήσωmiddot Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαιmiddot 20 ζῶ δὲ

οὐκέτι ἐγώ ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστόςmiddot ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ

ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ 21 οὐκ ἀθετῶ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦmiddot εἰ γὰρ διὰ

νόμου δικαιοσύνη ἄρα Χριστὸς δωρεὰν ἀπέθανεν

Textual Criticism

12 τινας τινα ndash the manuscript support for the former is strong and diverse and the former

reading is more logical in the context

12 ἦλθον ἦλθεν ndash the manuscript support is slightly more even on this variation but the

former reading is preferable matching the τινας of the preceding

Translation

11 But when Kephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face because he was

condemned 12 for before the coming of certain men from Jacob he ate together with the

Gentiles but when they came he drew back and separated himself fearing those of the

Circumcision 13 and the remaining Jews joined him in hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was

led astray by their hypocrisy 14 But when I saw that they were not dealing straight in line

with the truth of the gospel I said to Kephas before all ldquoIf you being a Jew do not live in a

Jewish manner why do you compel the nations to Judaise 15 We by nature are Jews and

not sinners of the Nations 16 but knowing that a human being is not justified by the works

of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ even we believed in Christ Jesus so that we

might be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law because by the works of the

law all flesh will not be justified 17 But if we are found to be seeking to be justified in Christ

and are ourselves sinners then is Christ a servant of sin Not so 18 For I through the law

died to the law so that I might live to God I have been co-crucified with Christ 20 and I no

longer live but Christ lives in me what I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God

that loved me and gave himself on my behalf 21 I do not nullify the grace of God for if

through the law came righteousness then Christ died vainly

Comments

In verse 11 we have both the continuations of Paulrsquos temporally marked biographical

defence but also the introduction of a new sequence Peter comes to Antioch and there is

a division between Peter and Paul which Paul goes on to relate Paul gives the reason for his

strong opposition ndash Peter lsquowas condemnedrsquo This may be understood as lsquoPeter stood

condemnedrsquo by his actions Paul then explains the basis for Peterrsquos condemnation in verse

12 His former practice was to share table-fellowship to eat with the Gentile believes (with

lsquothe nationsrsquo) an action that Paul understands as being in line with the Gospel message

And indeed Peter does too based upon Acts at least Yet a new party comes to Antioch

lsquocertain men from Jacob (James)rsquo While Peter and James certainly represent a Christianity

more deeply embedded in Jewish cultural practices it is a mistake to overread this diversity

Debate continues about how we should understand the relationship between these men

and James himself Are they authorised Do they represent James and Jamesrsquo position Acts

15 suggests not On this basis I am inclined to see the party as a group associated with

Jamesrsquo more Jewish Christian practice but more conservative than James himself and not

an authorised delegation by any means They have some association with James and

represent themselves as coming from him

Paul makes Peterrsquos very separation a gospel-issue That is the basis of Paulrsquos condemnation

of Peter Not that eating with Jews or eating according to Jewish food laws is wrong But

that to do so in a context that separates oneself from Gentile believers carries a

communication that they do not have genuine fellowship together

So much so that verse 13 introduces the language of hypocrisy Peterrsquos actions are out of

line with his own beliefs No doubt that if questioned Peterrsquos response would be some kind

of accommodation-line The point here is that in seeking not to offend the Jewish faction

Peter is in fact undermining the gospel message by cutting off the Gentile believers

So Paul confronts Peter in v14 as he observes that there practice does not align with lsquothe

truth of the Gospelrsquo His question highlights Peterrsquos hypocrisy since Peter is a Jew and is

free from the Law and so regularly eats and lives like a Gentile how can he in fact force

Gentiles to live in a Jewish manner This is the outcome of Peterrsquos withdrawal ndash it sends the

message that Gentile believers will need to lsquoJudaisersquo in order to have full insider-status in

the new Christian movement Even though Peter himself makes no move to lsquocompelrsquo the

Gentiles his actions are tantamount to the same

It is unclear when the speech of Paul shifts from historical recollection of conversation with

Peter to epistolary discourse with the Galatians but it is certainly not before v15 The lsquowersquo

of v15 follows (or establishes if you prefer) the distinct referents of we vs you in the letter

We referring at least to Paul and Peter but by implication other Jewish-background

believers is used to distinguish Peter and Paul from lsquoGentile sinnersrsquo Paul asserts this as a

statement of who they are lsquoby naturersquo They were born as Jews and so were not unclean

Gentiles And yet even being such Jews Paul adds the participial phrase of v16 lsquoknowing

that a human being is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christrsquo

Paul here states the key theological principle that drives both his rebuke of Peter and his

argument within Galatians He draws upon Psalm 1432 with a shift from πᾶς ζῶν to πᾶσα

σάρξ but more importantly adds ἐξ ἔργων νόμου The future tense δικαιωθήσεται may

refer to a decisively eschatological justification rather than a generic one This will have

important theological implications

Immediately then we enter into two significant debates The first is concerning the phrase ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου works of the Law For my part I am unpersuaded by the arguments of the NPP

to understand this as something like lsquoJewish boundary markers of ethno-religious identityrsquo

It certainly fails to function that way in Galatians Neither should it be pushed to a generic

lsquolegalismrsquo Rather it expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant context which

appears to be what the Judaising-teachers in Galatia are pushing for

The second is debate over the meaning of lsquorighteousnessrsquo and lsquojustifyrsquo language Again I find

the NPP unpersuasive That a la Wright justification should be redefined in largely

covenant-inclusion terms seems to make a nonsense of justification language at all I stand

with a traditional stream that sees lsquoto justifyrsquo to have legal connotations and to include the

idea of declaring and so performatively making right More on this to come

v16 then expresses Paulrsquos conviction from the scriptures that a human being is not (and

cannot) be right before God through obedience to the Law but can be so justified can be so

right through faith in Jesus Christ (In some instances I suppose one might take lsquofaith of

Jesus Christrsquo to refer to Jesusrsquo faithfulness but I find this position also unconvincing) The

fact that Peter and Paul both know this is why they as Jews trusted in Christ ndash there was

no salvation for them through the (works of the) Law Paul is triply emphatic here he first

declares what lsquowersquo (Jewish believers) know [justification through faith not works of law]

then declares that they believed in Christ so that [justification through faith not works of

law] because [justification through faith not works of law] Peter and Paul are in agreement

that one has to stop lsquodoingrsquo the Law

In v17 Paul raises the question if as believers in Christ and no longer Law-observers we are

lsquosinnersrsquo in that same old covenant sense that Paul raises back in v15 does this in fact make

the Messiah a servant or minister of sin Paulrsquos emphatic μὴ γένοιτο not only rules this out

but is an expression of its absurdity v18 gives the reason lsquoSinnerrsquo in the lsquoGentile sinnerrsquo

sense is an empty term ndash itrsquos been robbed of its meaning by the coming of the new

covenantal reality Rather to go back to the Law to the old covenantal reality would in fact

make Paul a transgressor In re-establishing the Law as a principle for life and obedience

before God the inevitable outcome is sin by the standard of the Law and so condemnation

by the Law Implicit in Paulrsquos argument is that Peterrsquos choice to withdraw from Gentile

company and meals is based on an observance of the Law not only not necessary any more

but in fact a return to it undoes and undermines the Gospel freedom that faith in Christ

brings

The final three verses shift to a very personal note as Paul relates his own salvific existential

reality The Law was the means of Paulrsquos death insofar as he was condemned by the Law

because the Law is a mechanism of death The Law produces neither righteousness nor life

with respect to God It isnrsquot designed to do so And yet Paulrsquos death to Law through Law is

the means for life ndash only through dying to the Law can the Jewish Paul live unto God Paul

immediately links such Law-death to the crucifixion Paulrsquos co-crucifixion with Christ is his

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Ἰουδαῖοι ὥστε καὶ Βαρναβᾶς συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει 14 ἀλλʼ ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ

ὀρθοποδοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ ἔμπροσθεν πάντωνmiddot Εἰ σὺ

Ἰουδαῖος ὑπάρχων ἐθνικῶς καὶ οὐκ Ἰουδαϊκῶς ζῇς πῶς τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις Ἰουδαΐζειν 15 Ἡμεῖς

φύσει Ἰουδαῖοι καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἐθνῶν ἁμαρτωλοί 16 εἰδότες δὲ ὅτι οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν ἵνα

δικαιωθῶμεν ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται

πᾶσα σάρξ 17 εἰ δὲ ζητοῦντες δικαιωθῆναι ἐν Χριστῷ εὑρέθημεν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἁμαρτωλοί ἆρα Χριστὸς

ἁμαρτίας διάκονος μὴ γένοιτοmiddot 18 εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομῶ παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν

συνιστάνω 19 ἐγὼ γὰρ διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον ἵνα θεῷ ζήσωmiddot Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαιmiddot 20 ζῶ δὲ

οὐκέτι ἐγώ ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστόςmiddot ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ

ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ 21 οὐκ ἀθετῶ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦmiddot εἰ γὰρ διὰ

νόμου δικαιοσύνη ἄρα Χριστὸς δωρεὰν ἀπέθανεν

Textual Criticism

12 τινας τινα ndash the manuscript support for the former is strong and diverse and the former

reading is more logical in the context

12 ἦλθον ἦλθεν ndash the manuscript support is slightly more even on this variation but the

former reading is preferable matching the τινας of the preceding

Translation

11 But when Kephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face because he was

condemned 12 for before the coming of certain men from Jacob he ate together with the

Gentiles but when they came he drew back and separated himself fearing those of the

Circumcision 13 and the remaining Jews joined him in hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was

led astray by their hypocrisy 14 But when I saw that they were not dealing straight in line

with the truth of the gospel I said to Kephas before all ldquoIf you being a Jew do not live in a

Jewish manner why do you compel the nations to Judaise 15 We by nature are Jews and

not sinners of the Nations 16 but knowing that a human being is not justified by the works

of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ even we believed in Christ Jesus so that we

might be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law because by the works of the

law all flesh will not be justified 17 But if we are found to be seeking to be justified in Christ

and are ourselves sinners then is Christ a servant of sin Not so 18 For I through the law

died to the law so that I might live to God I have been co-crucified with Christ 20 and I no

longer live but Christ lives in me what I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God

that loved me and gave himself on my behalf 21 I do not nullify the grace of God for if

through the law came righteousness then Christ died vainly

Comments

In verse 11 we have both the continuations of Paulrsquos temporally marked biographical

defence but also the introduction of a new sequence Peter comes to Antioch and there is

a division between Peter and Paul which Paul goes on to relate Paul gives the reason for his

strong opposition ndash Peter lsquowas condemnedrsquo This may be understood as lsquoPeter stood

condemnedrsquo by his actions Paul then explains the basis for Peterrsquos condemnation in verse

12 His former practice was to share table-fellowship to eat with the Gentile believes (with

lsquothe nationsrsquo) an action that Paul understands as being in line with the Gospel message

And indeed Peter does too based upon Acts at least Yet a new party comes to Antioch

lsquocertain men from Jacob (James)rsquo While Peter and James certainly represent a Christianity

more deeply embedded in Jewish cultural practices it is a mistake to overread this diversity

Debate continues about how we should understand the relationship between these men

and James himself Are they authorised Do they represent James and Jamesrsquo position Acts

15 suggests not On this basis I am inclined to see the party as a group associated with

Jamesrsquo more Jewish Christian practice but more conservative than James himself and not

an authorised delegation by any means They have some association with James and

represent themselves as coming from him

Paul makes Peterrsquos very separation a gospel-issue That is the basis of Paulrsquos condemnation

of Peter Not that eating with Jews or eating according to Jewish food laws is wrong But

that to do so in a context that separates oneself from Gentile believers carries a

communication that they do not have genuine fellowship together

So much so that verse 13 introduces the language of hypocrisy Peterrsquos actions are out of

line with his own beliefs No doubt that if questioned Peterrsquos response would be some kind

of accommodation-line The point here is that in seeking not to offend the Jewish faction

Peter is in fact undermining the gospel message by cutting off the Gentile believers

So Paul confronts Peter in v14 as he observes that there practice does not align with lsquothe

truth of the Gospelrsquo His question highlights Peterrsquos hypocrisy since Peter is a Jew and is

free from the Law and so regularly eats and lives like a Gentile how can he in fact force

Gentiles to live in a Jewish manner This is the outcome of Peterrsquos withdrawal ndash it sends the

message that Gentile believers will need to lsquoJudaisersquo in order to have full insider-status in

the new Christian movement Even though Peter himself makes no move to lsquocompelrsquo the

Gentiles his actions are tantamount to the same

It is unclear when the speech of Paul shifts from historical recollection of conversation with

Peter to epistolary discourse with the Galatians but it is certainly not before v15 The lsquowersquo

of v15 follows (or establishes if you prefer) the distinct referents of we vs you in the letter

We referring at least to Paul and Peter but by implication other Jewish-background

believers is used to distinguish Peter and Paul from lsquoGentile sinnersrsquo Paul asserts this as a

statement of who they are lsquoby naturersquo They were born as Jews and so were not unclean

Gentiles And yet even being such Jews Paul adds the participial phrase of v16 lsquoknowing

that a human being is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christrsquo

Paul here states the key theological principle that drives both his rebuke of Peter and his

argument within Galatians He draws upon Psalm 1432 with a shift from πᾶς ζῶν to πᾶσα

σάρξ but more importantly adds ἐξ ἔργων νόμου The future tense δικαιωθήσεται may

refer to a decisively eschatological justification rather than a generic one This will have

important theological implications

Immediately then we enter into two significant debates The first is concerning the phrase ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου works of the Law For my part I am unpersuaded by the arguments of the NPP

to understand this as something like lsquoJewish boundary markers of ethno-religious identityrsquo

It certainly fails to function that way in Galatians Neither should it be pushed to a generic

lsquolegalismrsquo Rather it expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant context which

appears to be what the Judaising-teachers in Galatia are pushing for

The second is debate over the meaning of lsquorighteousnessrsquo and lsquojustifyrsquo language Again I find

the NPP unpersuasive That a la Wright justification should be redefined in largely

covenant-inclusion terms seems to make a nonsense of justification language at all I stand

with a traditional stream that sees lsquoto justifyrsquo to have legal connotations and to include the

idea of declaring and so performatively making right More on this to come

v16 then expresses Paulrsquos conviction from the scriptures that a human being is not (and

cannot) be right before God through obedience to the Law but can be so justified can be so

right through faith in Jesus Christ (In some instances I suppose one might take lsquofaith of

Jesus Christrsquo to refer to Jesusrsquo faithfulness but I find this position also unconvincing) The

fact that Peter and Paul both know this is why they as Jews trusted in Christ ndash there was

no salvation for them through the (works of the) Law Paul is triply emphatic here he first

declares what lsquowersquo (Jewish believers) know [justification through faith not works of law]

then declares that they believed in Christ so that [justification through faith not works of

law] because [justification through faith not works of law] Peter and Paul are in agreement

that one has to stop lsquodoingrsquo the Law

In v17 Paul raises the question if as believers in Christ and no longer Law-observers we are

lsquosinnersrsquo in that same old covenant sense that Paul raises back in v15 does this in fact make

the Messiah a servant or minister of sin Paulrsquos emphatic μὴ γένοιτο not only rules this out

but is an expression of its absurdity v18 gives the reason lsquoSinnerrsquo in the lsquoGentile sinnerrsquo

sense is an empty term ndash itrsquos been robbed of its meaning by the coming of the new

covenantal reality Rather to go back to the Law to the old covenantal reality would in fact

make Paul a transgressor In re-establishing the Law as a principle for life and obedience

before God the inevitable outcome is sin by the standard of the Law and so condemnation

by the Law Implicit in Paulrsquos argument is that Peterrsquos choice to withdraw from Gentile

company and meals is based on an observance of the Law not only not necessary any more

but in fact a return to it undoes and undermines the Gospel freedom that faith in Christ

brings

The final three verses shift to a very personal note as Paul relates his own salvific existential

reality The Law was the means of Paulrsquos death insofar as he was condemned by the Law

because the Law is a mechanism of death The Law produces neither righteousness nor life

with respect to God It isnrsquot designed to do so And yet Paulrsquos death to Law through Law is

the means for life ndash only through dying to the Law can the Jewish Paul live unto God Paul

immediately links such Law-death to the crucifixion Paulrsquos co-crucifixion with Christ is his

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

12 His former practice was to share table-fellowship to eat with the Gentile believes (with

lsquothe nationsrsquo) an action that Paul understands as being in line with the Gospel message

And indeed Peter does too based upon Acts at least Yet a new party comes to Antioch

lsquocertain men from Jacob (James)rsquo While Peter and James certainly represent a Christianity

more deeply embedded in Jewish cultural practices it is a mistake to overread this diversity

Debate continues about how we should understand the relationship between these men

and James himself Are they authorised Do they represent James and Jamesrsquo position Acts

15 suggests not On this basis I am inclined to see the party as a group associated with

Jamesrsquo more Jewish Christian practice but more conservative than James himself and not

an authorised delegation by any means They have some association with James and

represent themselves as coming from him

Paul makes Peterrsquos very separation a gospel-issue That is the basis of Paulrsquos condemnation

of Peter Not that eating with Jews or eating according to Jewish food laws is wrong But

that to do so in a context that separates oneself from Gentile believers carries a

communication that they do not have genuine fellowship together

So much so that verse 13 introduces the language of hypocrisy Peterrsquos actions are out of

line with his own beliefs No doubt that if questioned Peterrsquos response would be some kind

of accommodation-line The point here is that in seeking not to offend the Jewish faction

Peter is in fact undermining the gospel message by cutting off the Gentile believers

So Paul confronts Peter in v14 as he observes that there practice does not align with lsquothe

truth of the Gospelrsquo His question highlights Peterrsquos hypocrisy since Peter is a Jew and is

free from the Law and so regularly eats and lives like a Gentile how can he in fact force

Gentiles to live in a Jewish manner This is the outcome of Peterrsquos withdrawal ndash it sends the

message that Gentile believers will need to lsquoJudaisersquo in order to have full insider-status in

the new Christian movement Even though Peter himself makes no move to lsquocompelrsquo the

Gentiles his actions are tantamount to the same

It is unclear when the speech of Paul shifts from historical recollection of conversation with

Peter to epistolary discourse with the Galatians but it is certainly not before v15 The lsquowersquo

of v15 follows (or establishes if you prefer) the distinct referents of we vs you in the letter

We referring at least to Paul and Peter but by implication other Jewish-background

believers is used to distinguish Peter and Paul from lsquoGentile sinnersrsquo Paul asserts this as a

statement of who they are lsquoby naturersquo They were born as Jews and so were not unclean

Gentiles And yet even being such Jews Paul adds the participial phrase of v16 lsquoknowing

that a human being is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christrsquo

Paul here states the key theological principle that drives both his rebuke of Peter and his

argument within Galatians He draws upon Psalm 1432 with a shift from πᾶς ζῶν to πᾶσα

σάρξ but more importantly adds ἐξ ἔργων νόμου The future tense δικαιωθήσεται may

refer to a decisively eschatological justification rather than a generic one This will have

important theological implications

Immediately then we enter into two significant debates The first is concerning the phrase ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου works of the Law For my part I am unpersuaded by the arguments of the NPP

to understand this as something like lsquoJewish boundary markers of ethno-religious identityrsquo

It certainly fails to function that way in Galatians Neither should it be pushed to a generic

lsquolegalismrsquo Rather it expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant context which

appears to be what the Judaising-teachers in Galatia are pushing for

The second is debate over the meaning of lsquorighteousnessrsquo and lsquojustifyrsquo language Again I find

the NPP unpersuasive That a la Wright justification should be redefined in largely

covenant-inclusion terms seems to make a nonsense of justification language at all I stand

with a traditional stream that sees lsquoto justifyrsquo to have legal connotations and to include the

idea of declaring and so performatively making right More on this to come

v16 then expresses Paulrsquos conviction from the scriptures that a human being is not (and

cannot) be right before God through obedience to the Law but can be so justified can be so

right through faith in Jesus Christ (In some instances I suppose one might take lsquofaith of

Jesus Christrsquo to refer to Jesusrsquo faithfulness but I find this position also unconvincing) The

fact that Peter and Paul both know this is why they as Jews trusted in Christ ndash there was

no salvation for them through the (works of the) Law Paul is triply emphatic here he first

declares what lsquowersquo (Jewish believers) know [justification through faith not works of law]

then declares that they believed in Christ so that [justification through faith not works of

law] because [justification through faith not works of law] Peter and Paul are in agreement

that one has to stop lsquodoingrsquo the Law

In v17 Paul raises the question if as believers in Christ and no longer Law-observers we are

lsquosinnersrsquo in that same old covenant sense that Paul raises back in v15 does this in fact make

the Messiah a servant or minister of sin Paulrsquos emphatic μὴ γένοιτο not only rules this out

but is an expression of its absurdity v18 gives the reason lsquoSinnerrsquo in the lsquoGentile sinnerrsquo

sense is an empty term ndash itrsquos been robbed of its meaning by the coming of the new

covenantal reality Rather to go back to the Law to the old covenantal reality would in fact

make Paul a transgressor In re-establishing the Law as a principle for life and obedience

before God the inevitable outcome is sin by the standard of the Law and so condemnation

by the Law Implicit in Paulrsquos argument is that Peterrsquos choice to withdraw from Gentile

company and meals is based on an observance of the Law not only not necessary any more

but in fact a return to it undoes and undermines the Gospel freedom that faith in Christ

brings

The final three verses shift to a very personal note as Paul relates his own salvific existential

reality The Law was the means of Paulrsquos death insofar as he was condemned by the Law

because the Law is a mechanism of death The Law produces neither righteousness nor life

with respect to God It isnrsquot designed to do so And yet Paulrsquos death to Law through Law is

the means for life ndash only through dying to the Law can the Jewish Paul live unto God Paul

immediately links such Law-death to the crucifixion Paulrsquos co-crucifixion with Christ is his

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Immediately then we enter into two significant debates The first is concerning the phrase ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου works of the Law For my part I am unpersuaded by the arguments of the NPP

to understand this as something like lsquoJewish boundary markers of ethno-religious identityrsquo

It certainly fails to function that way in Galatians Neither should it be pushed to a generic

lsquolegalismrsquo Rather it expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant context which

appears to be what the Judaising-teachers in Galatia are pushing for

The second is debate over the meaning of lsquorighteousnessrsquo and lsquojustifyrsquo language Again I find

the NPP unpersuasive That a la Wright justification should be redefined in largely

covenant-inclusion terms seems to make a nonsense of justification language at all I stand

with a traditional stream that sees lsquoto justifyrsquo to have legal connotations and to include the

idea of declaring and so performatively making right More on this to come

v16 then expresses Paulrsquos conviction from the scriptures that a human being is not (and

cannot) be right before God through obedience to the Law but can be so justified can be so

right through faith in Jesus Christ (In some instances I suppose one might take lsquofaith of

Jesus Christrsquo to refer to Jesusrsquo faithfulness but I find this position also unconvincing) The

fact that Peter and Paul both know this is why they as Jews trusted in Christ ndash there was

no salvation for them through the (works of the) Law Paul is triply emphatic here he first

declares what lsquowersquo (Jewish believers) know [justification through faith not works of law]

then declares that they believed in Christ so that [justification through faith not works of

law] because [justification through faith not works of law] Peter and Paul are in agreement

that one has to stop lsquodoingrsquo the Law

In v17 Paul raises the question if as believers in Christ and no longer Law-observers we are

lsquosinnersrsquo in that same old covenant sense that Paul raises back in v15 does this in fact make

the Messiah a servant or minister of sin Paulrsquos emphatic μὴ γένοιτο not only rules this out

but is an expression of its absurdity v18 gives the reason lsquoSinnerrsquo in the lsquoGentile sinnerrsquo

sense is an empty term ndash itrsquos been robbed of its meaning by the coming of the new

covenantal reality Rather to go back to the Law to the old covenantal reality would in fact

make Paul a transgressor In re-establishing the Law as a principle for life and obedience

before God the inevitable outcome is sin by the standard of the Law and so condemnation

by the Law Implicit in Paulrsquos argument is that Peterrsquos choice to withdraw from Gentile

company and meals is based on an observance of the Law not only not necessary any more

but in fact a return to it undoes and undermines the Gospel freedom that faith in Christ

brings

The final three verses shift to a very personal note as Paul relates his own salvific existential

reality The Law was the means of Paulrsquos death insofar as he was condemned by the Law

because the Law is a mechanism of death The Law produces neither righteousness nor life

with respect to God It isnrsquot designed to do so And yet Paulrsquos death to Law through Law is

the means for life ndash only through dying to the Law can the Jewish Paul live unto God Paul

immediately links such Law-death to the crucifixion Paulrsquos co-crucifixion with Christ is his

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

objective union and participation in Christ precisely and predominately in the Cross event

which is the ground of justification There is no justification without union with Christ This

union and identification is so complete that Paul in verse 20 can state that it is no longer the

ldquoIrdquo that lives There is a kind of ego-death for the Christian which I believe Paul generalises

in 517 Who then lives in Paul None other than the Messiah And yet Paul does not deny

that there is a lsquoPaulrsquo who carries out an existence lsquolife in the fleshrsquo but that life is entirely by

faith nor is it any generic faith but a very specific faith in the Son of God (royal-messianic

language) who loved Paul even to the point of substitionary death Paul is caught up in the

overwhelming experience of his own reception of grace the King loved me and died for me

the new life is the life united to the risen Christ All this to say that Paulrsquos gospel does not

nullify Godrsquos grace even the gracious gift of the Law Paul would in fact be nullifying the

grace of God if he demanded Torah-observance And yet if Torah-observance could in fact

bring righteousness if the Law was a mechanism for righteousness and life then Christ and

his death was pointless unnecessary And so Paul prepares to move into the third chapter

wherein he will go head to head with the Judaising teachers about their vain gospel which

renders Christrsquos death useless

31-14

Text 31 Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν οἷς κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη

ἐσταυρωμένος 2 τοῦτο μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε ἢ ἐξ

ἀκοῆς πίστεως 3 οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε 4 τοσαῦτα

ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ 5 ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξ

ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως 6 καθὼς Ἀβραὰμ ἐπίστευσεν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς

δικαιοσύνην 7 Γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ 8 προϊδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γραφὴ

ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ θεὸς προευηγγελίσατο τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 9 ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ 10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων

νόμου εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίν γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς

γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά 11 ὅτι δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ

τῷ θεῷ δῆλον ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 12 ὁ δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼmiddot Ὁ ποιήσας

αὐτὰ ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 13 Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου γενόμενος ὑπὲρ

ἡμῶν κατάρα ὅτι γέγραπταιmiddot Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὁ κρεμάμενος ἐπὶ ξύλου 14 ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ

εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ τῆς

πίστεως

Translation

31 O foolish Galatians who ensorcelled you to whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly

displayed as crucified 2 This alone I desire to learn from you did you receive the spirit by

works of the law or by the hearing of faith 3 Are you thus foolish having begun by the

spirit you now finish by the flesh 4 have you suffered such great things in vain If in fact in

vain 5 Then the one who furnishes to you the spirit and [who] works miracles among you

[is it] by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

6 Just as Abraham believed God and it was credited to him unto righteousnessa 7 know then

that those who are of faith these are the sons of Abraham 8 For the Scripture foreseeing

that God justifies the nations by faith fore-evangelised to Abraham that all the nations will

be blessed in youb 9 so that those of faith are blessed together with the believing Abraham

10 For as many are of works of the law they are under curse for it is written lsquoAccursed is

everyone who does not cleave to all the things written in the book of the law to do themrsquoc 11

that no one is justified by law before God is plain because the one righteous-by-faith will

lived 12 but the law is not by faith but the one doing these things will live by theme 13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law [by] becoming curse for you because it is

written accursed is everyone hung upon a treef 14 so that the blessing of Abraham might

come to the nations in Christ Jesus so that we might receive the promise of the spirit

through faith

a Gen 156 b Gen 123 c Dt 2726 d Hab 24 e Lev 184 f Dt 2123

Comments

The foolishness of the Galatians that leads off v1 is not necessarily a slight on the Galatiansrsquo

intelligence but is referred by the question lsquowho ensorcelled yoursquo to an external agent ndash

they have been tricked bewitched hoodwinked The gravity of such deception is brought

home by the fact that Jesus Christ was publicly displayed before their eyes as crucified As

Galatians it is unlikely that any at all were present to visually witness the crucifixion but the

declaration of the gospel has displayed before them this truth and now they are being

tricked as to its consequences

Paulrsquos questions in v2-3 rest on the principle that the way we begin the Christian life is the

manner in which we continue it It does not start on one basis and continue on another but

has a cohesive shape to it And so Paul frames the question in those terms ndash how did these

believers commence the Christian life (marked by the reception of the Spirit) Paul knows

that the answer to this is lsquoby the hearing of faithrsquo The options for rendering both lsquohearingrsquo

and lsquofaithrsquo are various Fung listing at least 8 combinations of active and passive senses in his

commentary For my part I read them as a passive sense of lsquohearingrsquo (what is heard) and an

objective genitive so that the import of the phrase is the content of the hearing ndash the

message of the Faith The Galatian believers received the spirit when they heard (and

believed) the gospel proclamation They did not receive the spirit by performing works of

the law (a point the Jewish-background believers in Galatia would well know) Why then

(v3) would they think that they ought to continue (lsquofinishrsquo) and complete the Christian life

lsquoby fleshrsquo The contrast between law and faith in v2 and flesh and spirit in v3 is meant to be

parallel but not identical It is the work of the spirit to produce faith and the one who has

faith lives by the spirit not under law The one under law lives life apart from the spirit and

so entirely in the flesh Attempting to live under the law in the flesh can only be a life lived

in vain since that was their previous way of life that leads to death

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

I have already expressed my view that lsquoworks of the Lawrsquo will not work in the NPP way and

so repeat here that its sense is that lsquoit expresses Torah-obedience within a Mosaic covenant

contextrsquo Paul is not opposed to works but to works of the law rather than works of the

Spirit Works in the first sphere are under a curse because they are (a) not unto

justification (b) no one does them anyway while the works of the Spirit are the grace and

faith lived out in the believer

Introduced in v4 is a further question that relates to that aspect of Christian life linked with

suffering and so with perseverance If they are attempting to go back under law and live by

the flesh then their suffering will indeed have been in vain Use of the phrase lsquosufferedrsquo

probably refers to social exclusion isolation and loss of determined identity and status The

negative sense of lsquosufferedrsquo is to be preferred to options that read it as lsquothings experiencedrsquo

The particle lsquothenrsquo in v5 ought not be read as following directly on as a logical consequence

of v4 but as a continuance of the series of questions referring to the work of God amongst

them and whether (again) such work is instrumentally related to Torah-performance or to

faith in the gospel

The καθώς that introduces the citation links it immediately with 31-5 and the implied

comparison is between the Galatiansrsquo reception of the Spirit and Abrahamrsquos being reckoned

righteous The premises then include the work of the Spirit in Abraham and the exclusive

dichotomy between faith and works I agree with Martyn that the verse is distinctly Paulrsquos

given its use in Romans (though for slightly different purposes) Thus Paul in this verse

establishes the connection between faith ndash hearing ndash Spirit-reception The textual form of

the citation is almost identical to the LXX except for the dislocation of Abrahamrsquos name To

the extent that we can read the Judaisersrsquo argument out of the text it seems that they are

preaching a need to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo in order to receive the blessings Part of the

effect of citing Genesis 15 is that it is both post-promises and pre-circumcision

The second thesis that Silva identifies lies in vv7 9 that the sons of Abraham are those of

faith and these in turn are blessed along with Abraham Verse 7 is emphatic in its

identification of the sons of Abraham and probably represent Paulrsquos counter-claim to the

opponentsrsquo appeal to the Galatians to become lsquosons of Abrahamrsquo (ie sons of the

Covenant) There is a sense of status associated with the use of lsquosonsrsquo over against

lsquochildrenrsquo

The second scriptural citation in v8 has a number of distinctive features Firstly Paul

personifies scripture in a rare way Secondly he characteristically pre-empts the reading of

the verse with his phrase lsquoGod justifies the Gentiles by faithrsquo The use of προευηγγελίσατο

is also remarkable underlying the continuity of the Gospel with the OT scriptures so that

whatever discontinuity Paul asserts later it cannot be read as fundamental disjunction

between the scriptures and the new revelation in Christ The citation itself conflates Gen

1231818

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Gen 123 καὶ εὐλογήσω τοὺς εὐλογοῦντάς σε καὶ τοὺς καταρωμένους σε

καταράσομαι καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς

Gen 1818 Αβρααμ δὲ γινόμενος ἔσται εἰς ἔθνος μέγα καὶ πολύ καὶ

ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τῆς γῆς

cf also Sir 4421 διὰ τοῦτο ἐν ὅρκῳ ἔστησεν αὐτῷ ἐνευλογηθῆναι ἔθνη ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

πληθῦναι αὐτὸν ὡς χοῦν τῆς γῆς καὶ ὡς ἄστρα ἀνυψῶσαι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ καὶ

κατακληρονομῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπὸ θαλάσσης ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ἀπὸ ποταμοῦ ἕως ἄκρου τῆς

γῆς

The replacement of αἱ φυλαί with τὰ ἔθνη is not exceptionally significant except that it

reinforces the Gentile-focus of Paulrsquos argument The parallel with Sirach 4421 is also not

particularly illuminating except for the way in which Sirach speaks of ἐν σπέρματι αὐτοῦ

which links with Paulrsquos further argument

That v8 functions as a ground for the thesis of v7 9 depends upon Paulrsquos assertion

concerning v8 that the Gentiles blessing comes about in Abraham in conjunction with the

identification of the sons of Abraham with those of faith not the descendants according to

the flesh Indeed if the blessing of the Gentiles was for those according to the flesh then

the blessing of Abraham would never come to Gentiles per se since covenantal

incorporation would always be necessary The first participial phrase may suggest (qua

Kern) that Abraham is being viewed here as a Gentile

Verse 9 summarises 6-8 with its result clause that (a) those of faith (v7) are (b) blessed (v8)

(c) along with believing Abraham (v6) There exists a unity with Abraham that is prior to

Moses and that unity is by faith There is a translation conundrum over the phrase σὺν τῷ

πιστῷ Ἀβραάμ whether it is best rendered lsquowith believing Abrahamrsquo lsquowith faithful

Abrahamrsquo lsquowith Abraham by faithrsquo The insertion of τῷ πιστῷ between the preposition and

the name seems to rule out the last of the three options despite Kernrsquos backing That the

unity exists by faith can be established on other grounds The second option seems over-

nuanced ndash Abrahamrsquos faithfulness in this context is exactly in believing the promise(s) given

to him

Silva splits 10 into 10a and b identifying 10a as the 3rd thesis and 10b as the grounds Again

Paul pre-empts the interpretation of his citation with the principle that lsquofor as many as are

of the works of the law are under a cursersquo Comparing verse and source

10 Ὅσοι γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσίν ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσίνmiddot γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι

ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ

νόμου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά

Dt 2726 Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὃς οὐκ ἐμμενεῖ ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς λόγοις τοῦ

νόμου τούτου τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτούς καὶ ἐροῦσιν πᾶς ὁ λαός Γένοιτο

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

A number of distinctive elements are apparent Silva highlights that Paul retains the two

instances of πᾶς which the LXX adds to the MT and that his variation in the first instance

suggests it is not unintentional Secondly and more interestingly is the change from lsquoof the

Lawrsquo to lsquoin the book of the Lawrsquo The effect of this change is to expand the reference from a

specific part of the law which Dt 2726 has in view to the Law as a whole Silva suggests

that the phrase may be taken from Dt 3010 and on this basis I think itrsquos fair to say that Paul

is not unfaithful in his reading of the text at this point

One must still wrestle with the difficulty that Martyn et alii raise that Paul seems to read

the verse against its plain meaning Surely one would think the curse of the Law is for those

who donrsquot keep the Law which is what it seems to be saying Silva identifies the argumentrsquos

assumed premise as lsquoall are disobedientrsquo which he recognises as a disputed premise The

contrast between οἱ ἐκ πίστεως and οἱ ἐξ ἔργων is surely not to be by-passed For Paulrsquos

citation here speaks of πᾶς but his application concerns ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων Non-proselyte

Gentiles would certainly be a hard category to fit into οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and so his argument

demands a reading in terms of Jewish observers of the Law apart from faith It is thus not

those who observe or do not observe the Law (both failing) nor even those who suppose

themselves to be observing the Law but all those under the Law who fall equally under its

curse In this vein I find myself concluding that v10 has a primary redemptive-historical

reference to Jews under the old covenant

Sanders would raise a different issue that failing in the Law was not such a big deal one

would offer the appropriate sacrifices The curse in view is probably to be linked to the

larger redemptive-historical picture and so to the Deuteronomic curses for covenant failure

which for Israel lead to exile and judgment to the extent that v10 represents individual

curse it is because the story of Israelrsquos failure is paradigmatic for individual covenant failure

exile and judgment

Silva identifies 11a as the fourth thesis which complements thesis 3 The grounds for this

thesis is the citation from Hab 24 Martyn argues that this verse as with Gen 156 is part of

Paulrsquos scriptural ammo and given that these two verses are the only 2 OT texts that bring

together faith and righteousness it seems likely Silva7 sees part of the function of 11 as to

identify Paulrsquos opponents as οἱ ἐξ ἔργων and not οἱ ἐκ πίστεως in conjunction with v10rsquos

condemnation of those ἐξ ἔργων under the Law

The citation itself is problematic the MT reading lsquobut the righteous one by his faith will liversquo

which LXX takes as lsquomy faithrsquo with μου which Paul excludes from his citation Some have

argued that Paul deliberately ambiguates the faith on view but if so he is only doing so by

bringing it closer to the MT More likely the context of Paulrsquos argument itself adequately

resolves the question of the faith in view the believerrsquos Whether the ἐκ πίστεως be

attached to lsquothe righteous onersquo (so Fung) or lsquowill liversquo is almost incidental since even the 7 Silva Moiseacutes lsquoGalatiansrsquo in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Edited by GK Beale and DA Carson Grand Rapids Mich Baker Academic Nottingham Apollos 2007) 801

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

latter reading must relate eschatological enlivenment to faith correlated elsewhere with

justification Whether one could in fact keep the law thus becomes irrelevant because it is

the righteous one who is so by faith that will live]

Silva spends some time (802) defending Paulrsquos use of Habakkuk contextually against the

reading that Habakkuk 24 has only in view the faithfulness of the Law-keeper lsquofor

Habakkuk there was no such dichotomy between faith and faithfulness as we often

assumersquo

Concerning v12 Silva reads this as the stated premise for thesis 4 (v11a) along with the

grounds for that premise This reading incorporates the fourth citation under the third

seeing Lev 185 as a proof of Paulrsquos justification-by-faith reading This is a long way from

Martyn who basically sees Lev 185 as a proof against Paulrsquos justification by faith which

Paul raises only to discount as false

The adjustments made to the text from Lev 185 are slight and not dramatically interesting

They are almost all occasioned by the new context of the verse and the removal from the

original context grammatically rather than theologically More difficult is the theology of

Paulrsquos argument Again he seems to be reading the verse over and against the Law itself

from which he quotes Fung rightly recognises that lsquowhile the goal envisaged is the same

faith and law appear as two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive principlesrsquo8 And

yet this must raise some questions Is the goal of the law faith by works And if so hasnrsquot

Paul done either violence to the context of Lev 185 which seems to have more to say than

a Torah-based works-righteousness or else violence to the scriptural canon in rendering

Lev 185 false as Martyn argues

Personally I can only find the resolution in the hidden premise that it is not the failure of

the Law but the failure of Law-observers that renders this verse intelligible in context For

Paul there is indeed a theoretical life through Law-observance but this is in reality

unobtainable not because of the Lawrsquos deficiency but the Fleshrsquos The Law is quite right to

say that the one who does these things will live by them but we are quite wrong to suppose

that any of us can do so This I would argue is further reinforced by comparison with Paulrsquos

triangulation of LawSinGrace in Romans 7 I would posit an implicit reference then to the

righteousness of Christ which is both by his faith and his faithfulness expressed in perfect

and active obedience to the Torah For in Paulrsquos curse language otherwise the Christ

himself would be under the Curse of the Law since he was under the Law and did not keep

it

In v13 Paulrsquos use of Dt 2123 raises a number of issues Firstly he alters κεκατηραμένος to

ἐπικατάρατος aligning his citation with 311 This raises the question to what extent it is

8 Ronald Y K Fung The Epistle to the Galatians (The New International Commentary on the New

Testament Grand Rapids MI Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Co 1988) 145-46

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

valid to identify the curse of Dt 2726 with 2123 Secondly Paul omits ὑπὸ θεοῦ from his

citation almost certainly intentional but with what intention Silva suggests he may simple

be trying to avoid an unnecessary distraction to his main argument9 Fung suggests he is

avoiding the implication that Christ was cursed by God because of its theological import

This I suspect comes closer to the truth but needs more nuancing because in becoming lsquoa

cursersquo for us he was in some sense cursed by God so that Paulrsquos omission carries more

refinement than simple avoidance of the plain text Indeed as Silva posits perhaps Paul

simply doesnrsquot wish to draw out the cursed yet not cursed distinctions

This is Silvarsquos fourth thesis and grounds and its relation to the preceding is slightly

discontinuous That is having to some extent resolved the faithlaw dichotomy by divorcing

the blessing from the Law and attaching it to faith and aligning the curse with the Law and

the inevitable failure to keep it Paul re-orients the reader to the only means of escaping the

curse of the Law the Cross

The double-barrelled purpose clause of v14 completes the argumentative flow of Gal 36-14

Following Kern we read these two clauses consecutively so that the initial result if the

blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus which in turn leads to the reception by

(Jewish believers) of the promise of the Spirit through faith That these two elements are

not exclusive should be already apparent by the way Paul has linked Abrahamic blessing

with reception of the Spirit in 31-5 6-9

The argument of those who want to read Galatians apocalyptically at this point insists upon

the salvation-historical logic of the Judaizers who trace Abrahamic lineage through the

Mosaic Law and so regard incorporation into the covenant people a necessary pre-condition

of receiving the Abrahamic blessing Over against this Paul relativises and polemicises

against the Law instead treating the punctiliar and cosmically invasive event of the Christrsquos

crucifixion To this point though Paul has not spoken concerning the Lawrsquos role and so it is

too soon to disregard any salvation-historical element to his OT usage His treatment of the

sons of Abraham faith Law and curse are all predicated on a different reading of

redemptive history not the absence of one as is seen in the second half of the chapter

It is worth noting the flow of thought here Jesus became a curse for those under the law

which leads the gentiles to inherit the blessing of Abraham by Christ which leads to the

Jews entering the eschatological inheritance the blessingpromise is the Spirit the Spirit is

how we enter and continue in the Christian life cf 38 both justification and the Spirit

appear to be hand-in-hand the content of the promiseblessing v14 is the exposition of

Christrsquos redeeming work in v13

9 Silva 797

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

315-29

Text 15 Ἀδελφοί κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγωmiddot ὅμως ἀνθρώπου κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ

ἐπιδιατάσσεται 16 τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦmiddot οὐ λέγειmiddot Καὶ

τοῖς σπέρμασιν ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνόςmiddot Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός 17 τοῦτο δὲ

λέγωmiddot διαθήκην προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη γεγονὼς

νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 18 εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία οὐκέτι ἐξ

ἐπαγγελίαςmiddot τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ διʼ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ θεός 19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων

χάριν προσετέθη ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτουmiddot 20

ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν 21 Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ

γένοιτοmiddot εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζῳοποιῆσαι ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἂν ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη 22 ἀλλὰ

συνέκλεισεν ἡ γραφὴ τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν 23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν

μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι 24 ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ

πίστεως δικαιωθῶμενmiddot 25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν 26 πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε Χριστὸν

ἐνεδύσασθεmiddot 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ

θῆλυmiddot πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ 29 εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ ἄρα τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ σπέρμα

ἐστέ κατʼ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι 10

Translation

15 Brothers I speak in respect of human affairs likewise11 no-one sets aside or adds

a codicil to a ratified human contract 16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to

his seed it does not say lsquoand to seedsrsquo as in the case of many but as in the case of one

lsquoand to your seed12rsquo which is Christ 17 this is what I mean the covenant13 previously-

ratified by God the law14 having come after 430 years does not nullify ndash unto the destroying

the promise 18 For if the inheritance is of law it is no longer of promise but God showed

grace to Abraham through [the] promise

19 Why then the law it was added because of transgression until the seed to which

it was promised might come mediated through angels by the hand of a mediator 20 Now a

mediator is not of one but God is one 21 Is then the Law against the promises [of God]

Not so For if a law were given one that was able to make alive righteousness would truly

be by law 22 but the Scripture shut all things up under sin so that the promise by faith in

Jesus Christ be given to those that believe

23 Before the coming of faith we were held in custody under law shut up until the

coming faith be revealed 24 so that the law became our pedagogue until Christ so that we

10 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 315ndash29

11 used to introduce comparisons 12 singular 13 object 14 subject

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

might be justified by faith 25 but with the coming of faith we are no longer under a

pedagogue 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus 27 for as many [of

you] were baptised into Christ you were clothed in Christ 28 There is neither Jew nor

Greek there is neither slave nor freeman there is neither male and female for you are one

in Christ Jesus 29 and if you are of Christ then you are Abrahamrsquos seed heirs according to

promise

Comments

Silvarsquos historical redemptive take is explicit in the way he connects 36-14 to 315

and the introduction of the term διαθήκη15 Almost directly contrary to this Martyn links

315 with Paulrsquos apocalyptic and anti-redemptive historical argument For Martyn the

reference in v15 to ἡ διαθήκη is a secularising reference a move to disassociate the word

from the Judaisers use of it in Mosaic terms and part of Paulrsquos argument to align διαθήκη

with the promise to Abraham Key to Martynrsquos argument is that the analogy of an alteration

to the will is illustrated in v19 by the giving of the Law through angels For Martynrsquos Paul

the Law is an angelic addition seeking to alter the prior promise of God

However the suggestion that Paul employs διαθήκη in a purely secular sense in v15

is severely open to question Given the context of Paulrsquos own argument and background itrsquos

difficult to see how Paul could try and secularise and detheologise the term at exactly this

point alone

The citation in 316 forms the hermeneutical crux of the passage and casts it in

distinctively redemptive-historical terms At least that seems obvious but Martyn argues

that this particular verse is the death-knell to a redemptive historical reading Martyn

grounds this is Paulrsquos punctiliar and singular understanding of τὸ σπέρμα over against the

Teachersrsquo linear and corporate reading16 And yet once you connect the distinct singularity

of the seed in v16 with the corporate and incorporated reading of the same in 326-29 it is

hard to maintain that Paulrsquos reading is only individual Indeed 315-29 continues Paulrsquos

argument about who οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἀβρααμ are οἱ ἐκ πίστεως contra οἱ κατὰ σάρκα The

language of promise in 316 implies fulfilment which rests upon a temporal distance and

thus a historical trajectory That Paul sees that summarily instanced in the singular Christ is

by no means a defeater for a salvation history reading

With regards to the citation that Paul employs he is primarily referring to Genesis

1315 and 178 but in regards to the singularity of the seed reference the final and

summative set of promises that Abraham receives comes in Genesis 2217 ldquohe shall possess

the gates of his [sg] enemiesrdquo

15 Silva 804 16 Martyn 347-8

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

317 then does not simply pit the inferiority of the Covenant against the Promise but

relativises the Covenant by its temporal sequencing after the Promise That is the Covenant

can only be understood with attention to its posteriority to the Promise which conditions

how exactly the Covenant may be understood Paulrsquos argument depends upon the

sequencing of salvation history

Martyn to be fair is not without real insights into the text at this point For example

he highlights the way in which the motif of transferring or entering into the people of God is

probably more the theological language of the Judaisers not Paul and that in Galatians Paul

speaks repeatedly of how the blessing comes to the Gentiles that it is the God-directed

invasion of the cosmos not the lsquohuman movement into blessednessrsquo that is the focus17 And

yet even if entry language is being taken from the Judaisers Paul redefines and re-employs

their terms so that while it is God who is the agent of blessedness there is an incorporation

motif operating for Paul incorporation into the Christ not under the Law

Silva highlights the distinct chronological references ἄχρις (319) πρό (23) ἐφrsquo ὅσον χρόνον

(41) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (44) and relates this to (at least) 3 epochs of

history Promise Law (Sinai -gt Christ) Faith18 This if ever there was is a redemptive-

historical scheme and Paulrsquos precise point is not to abstract Law and pit it against Promise amp

Faith in a kind of conceptual conflict but to re-align the redemptive historical place of Law

over against the Teachersrsquo placement of the same

The effect of v18 is to marginalise the Lawrsquos role in salvation history If the Law had the

function the Judaisers are attributing to it as the basis of the inheritance then this would

effectually undermine the promises as promises the fact that Abraham was shown grace by

God through promise and not Law establishes the counter-factuality of the Judaisersrsquo

interpretation This naturally raises the question of why the Law which is framed as a

redemptive-historical question

319 then is an answer to that redemptive-historical question not merely an

abstract question about why the Law at all Paulrsquos answer is three-fold giving a purpose

(τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν) a temporal telos (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται) and a

comparative point with the Promise (διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου) In reverse

order the point of comparison cannot be read as Martyn does as if the Law were the work

of angels contra God and so offering some kind of false promise to Israel This would

destroy all integrity in Paulrsquos use of the Law both in Galatians and his other letters Rather

the comparison has the object of subjugating the Law to the Promise by pointing out its

dual mediation (angels Moses) against the unilateral and direct nature of the Promise

spoken by God to Abraham

17 Martyn 348-9 18 Silva 805

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

The second element also subordinates the Law by giving it a temporal frame that

finds its fulfilment not purely in its own terms but in terms of the prior-existing Promise

and the Seed Thus the pattern of Promise-Fulfilment encloses includes and concludes the

Law This of course raises the very first question and answer-clause why the Law at all

Fung understands this and I agree as making sin lsquoillegalrsquo19 It matches the slavery and

confinement language of 322ff

The enigmatic verse ldquoNow a mediator is not of one but God is onerdquo requires some

kind of redemptive-historical interpretation given the strongly redemptive-historical focus

of the verses before and after The Law involves a somebody giving something to a

somebody else there is an lsquoexternalrsquo movement in the covenant dimension In relation to

God the movement of the covenant is humanward but this functions alongside another

lsquocovenantrsquo which is entirely within Godrsquos being ie between the Father and the Son the

divine Son incorporating and uniting humanity within his two natures in the one person

The mediatorial yet oneness of this covenantal relationship implies a superiority to it

compared to virtually all Pentateuchal passages dealing with the presence of God which

involve mediation through angels There is something abundantly lsquoone-sidedrsquo about the

promise which does not have its counterpart in the (Sinai) covenant

Further reflection on the salvation-historical place of the Law continues in 321 with

the rhetorical question about whether the law is κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν If Paulrsquos point were

purely antagonistic the answer would have to be affirmative Martyn takes the very

question as proof of the strong and lsquogenuine antimonyrsquo between law and Promise in Paul20

But surely Paulrsquos emphatic denial of the opposition is not merely about the lsquoeffective

oppositionrsquo but whether the opposition is purposeful Indeed his answer in 21b denies to

the Law an enlivening and justifying role Paulrsquos point is precisely that the Law was not able

to do it because if it was it would have but it doesnrsquot therefore it canrsquot (implied) therefore

it wasnrsquot designed to do so Paulrsquos aim here is to tackle head on the Judaisersrsquo version of

salvation-history in which the place of the Law is to give life and justify with his gospel-

driven alternative placement of the Law which is not to give life and justify but rather

preparatory (however we understand the hemmed-in and παιδαγωγός language) until the

coming of the promised Seed

It is interesting that v22 introduces lsquothe Scripturersquo as the agent rather than lsquothe

Lawrsquo which shuts all things up under sin Given Paulrsquos context a reference to the Old

Testament and thus primarily the Law is undeniable Paul continues to locate the salvation-

historical purpose of the Word of God but this time broadens it so that all things are under

sin In doing so Paul gives us a further insight into the place of sin within the sovereign and

redemptive purposes of God The reference to promise in the second half of the verse

19 Fung interprets the χάριν phrase as giving a purpose rather than causal basis suggesting that the sense is

lsquoto make wrongdoing a legal offencersquo 20 Martyn 358

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

should be taken to refer to the by now broad encompassing promise given to Abraham

which by faith in Jesus finds its reception among believers The so-called lsquoredundancyrsquo of

the double use of faith does not require the first use to be taken as lsquofaithfulness of Christrsquo

The same thought is continued and reiterated in v24 as the Law gives way in

salvation history until the time of Christ In antiquity the pedagogus is a slave who makes

sure the boy gets an education he is not a tutor at all rather he is a kind of educational

bouncer taking the boy to school and sitting at the back and making sure he goes home and

does his homework The Lutheran existential school-master interpretation does not work

here particularly since Galatians works with a fairly clear JewGentile distinction that does

not allow the application that the Law teaches Gentiles in order to lead them to Christ A

boy who had reached adulthood would not hang around his pedagogue it would have

suspect connotations Thus to go back under the pedagogue would be childish stupid and

a little creepy Yet with v25 lsquoadulthoodrsquo has come and in terms of a different metaphor

lsquoslaveryrsquo is done with Those who exhibit faith in Jesus are no longer children no longer

slaves and so are no longer to live as such

This is the thought that leads into vv26-29 and returns Paul to the question of who

the sons of Abraham are (37) which is here re-configured as the sons of God Adoption into

Abrahamrsquos family is adoption into Godrsquos family and in both cases is instrumentally through

faith and objectively in Christ The connection in v27 is to express this in terms of baptism

and lsquoclothingrsquo The close connection within the New Testament between faith and baptism

should not be diminished insofar as baptism is the ordinary consequent public

incorporating sign of (repentance and) faith For Paul it is simply normal to equate those

who have faith in Jesus with those baptised in Christ and this extends to the clothing

metaphor Those who are sons of God are clothed with this new identity The outcome of

such clothing is a radical alteration of the status of the believer as expressed in v28 So

constitutive of the new identity is its in-Christ nature that the former distinctions are

rendered abolished both (a) as making any difference in regards to entrance and

incorporation into Christ That is with regards to being in Christ there is no difference of

instrumentality in becoming in Christ and no difference in regards to status within the

believing community on the basis of (formerly) being a Jew or a Gentile This is the primary

distinction that has been operative within the discourse of the epistle but Paul extends it

further to the social distinction between slaves and free citizens no doubt in part because

slavery has been a part of this discourse both metaphorically and literarily-historically

Furthermore Paul applies this abolition of distinction to gender identity as well

Some have pushed v28 as the basis for an abolition of difference as a factor of

identity at all particularly in the gender and ministry debates There are several problems

with this approach Firstly it pays scant attention to the context of Paulrsquos argumentation

within Galatians which does not deal with either ministry roles or ethical instruction in

regards to role differentiation at all Secondly it creates a canonical inconsistency within

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Paulrsquos literary corpus that is difficult to reconcile without violating canonical integrity

Simply put Paul elsewhere uses exactly such differences both slave and free and male and

female as the basis for applying the same ethical principles in differentiated application For

example Paul is prepared to use ldquoGod is our Masterrdquo as the principle that informs the

pattern for both earthly masters (fair and just treatment Col 41) as well as earthly slaves

(Eph 65)

Paulrsquos argument then is about status identity and entry into Christ not about

ontological existence One is lsquoin Christrsquo as a Jew or as a Greek as a male or as a female as a

free citizen or as a slave but onersquos primary identity in Christ is determined by that very

being in Christ At the same time one does not cease to possess these idiomata and to live

out that unity and equality in Christ in terms of the diversity of human existence

This oneness in Christ leads Paul in his flow of thought back to the assertion that to

be in Christ (v27-28) is to be a son of God (v26) is to be Abrahamrsquos descendant The fact

that Paul has shifted back here to a lsquopluralrsquo understanding of lsquoseedrsquo should not mislead us to

conclude inconsistency on his behalf Paul is fully aware of the plural interpretation and that

the very word seed can function as singular for collective but the whole thrust of his

argument in this respect has been to assert the individual nature of the seed as the basis for

understanding the corporate fulfilment of the promise in terms of incorporation into the one

heir It is only in Christ that Jews and Gentiles alike believers are heirs to the promise

Therersquos nowhere else to be except in Christ to impose Law is to step outside the blessing21

and bring people under curse and itrsquos a perverse thing to do

41-11

Text 41 Λέγω δέ ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου κύριος πάντων ὤν 2 ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός 3 οὕτως καὶ ἡμεῖς ὅτε

ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἤμεθα δεδουλωμένοιmiddot 4 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ

χρόνου ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον 5 ἵνα

τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν 6 ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοί ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς

τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζονmiddot Αββα ὁ πατήρ 7 ὥστε οὐκέτι εἶ δοῦλος

ἀλλὰ υἱόςmiddot εἰ δὲ υἱός καὶ κληρονόμος διὰ θεοῦ

8 Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖςmiddot 9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν

μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα οἷς

πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε 10 ἡμέρας παρατηρεῖσθε καὶ μῆνας καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἐνιαυτούς 11

φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μή πως εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς

21 What is the blessing Justification (36-9) and the Spirit (314)

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Textual Criticism

v6 ἡμῶν vs ὑμῶν The range of early and diverse witnesses supports the first person

rather than the second which seems to have arisen from a desire to conform with ἐστε

earlier in the verse

v7 διὰ θεοῦ Again diverse and early witnesses support this reading which readily explains

a number of other variants

Translation

1 So I say for as long a time as the heir is a minor though being lord of all he differs in no

respect from a slave 2 but he is under guardians and household-stewards until the fatherrsquos

appointed day 3 Thus also we when we were minors we were enslaved under the

fundamental principles 4 but when the fulness of time came God sent his son born22 of a

woman born under law 5 so that he might redeem those under the law so that we might

receive sonship 6 And because you are sons God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts

crying lsquoAbba Fatherrsquo 7 so that you[sg] are no longer a slave but a son and if a son also an

heir through God

8 But at that time not knowing God you were enslaved to those that are not by nature

gods 9 but not knowing God rather being known by God how do you turn again to the

weak and poor elements to which all over again you wish to serve-as-slaves 10 You observe

days and months and seasons and years 11 I fear for you lest somehow I have laboured in

vain among you

Comments

The section introduced following the climactic final elements of chapter three with its emphasis on

Sons of God through Christ continues a number of the foci of chapter three reconfigured around

different nuances In vv1-7 there is a strong attention paid to the Jewish situation with temporal

sequencing that continues Paulrsquos expounding of the place of and apologia for the Law

In vv1-2 Paul lays out the basis for his analogy that in a sonrsquos minority age though he be lsquolord of allrsquo

ndash ie implicitly the master and possessor of all the benefits that will accrue to him through

inheritance so long as he remains in infancy he differs in no respect from a slave The condition of

minority is marked by subordination under lsquoguardians and household stewardsrsquo and yet the

condition is temporally limited by the day appointed by the father

22 γενόμενον both here and in the next clause

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

As clear as Paulrsquos initial framing is the application of this analogy in vv3-7 has been less clearly

appropriated Just as in 324-25 I have rejected the Lutheran reading of the Law as a schoolmaster

especially in regards to Gentiles so too we should not attempt to read that in here The first person

language in the passage can be read consistently with regards to Jewish-background believers And

so in v3 when Paul speaks of lsquowersquo he speaks of himself and other Jewish-background believers who

were (a) in a position of minority (b) enslaved under the fundamental principles

It begins to emerge why Paul sets up the analogy in vv1-2 by noting the absence of distinction

between son and slave Paul speaks of the sons of the household (Jews under the Sinai covenant) as

being in their minority and so they in no respect differed from slaves This paves the way for Paul to

speak of them as being enslaved That Gentiles arewere enslaved goes without saying and that

they were enslaved to the fundamental principles becomes more evident in v9 That the Jews were

enslaved is a far more radical idea that Paul is introducing here The lsquofundamental principlesrsquo

represent a challenging translation conundrum since in v9 and a more clear Gentile context it

would be natural to read them as cosmological elements v3 however refers them to the Law Thus

a shift from lsquofundamental elements of learningrsquo to a more generic lsquofundamental principles that

underlie the world and into which we are initiated and enslavedrsquo seems to be in view The usage of

the term by Paul in both the Jewish and Gentile contexts here creates a new sense of the phrase

which distinctly relates Jewish and Gentile spiritual enslavement

The term lsquofulness of timersquo in v4 is then a kind of play as it resonates both with the lsquofulness of timersquo

in which an heir in their minority will come into their majority as so differ from the slave as well as a

redemptive-historical perspective in which the lsquofulness of timersquo corresponds to the lsquoFatherrsquos

appointed dayrsquo Again we see that the fundamental shift in temporal economy is the coming of

Christ in the sending of the Son by the Father There is rich Christological and soteriological material

here as the one who is Begotten from Eternity is lsquoborn of a womanrsquo and lsquoborn under lawrsquo He

becomes what he is not by nature (born as a creature in slavery under the law) so that we might

become what we are not by nature (sons rather than slaves) The purpose of the incarnation is

redemptive explicitly so in v5 ldquothat he might redeem those under the lawrdquo Redemption is bound

up in Adoption Indeed the purpose is two-fold and arguably two (logical) steps redemption for

those under the law leads to adoption Verse 6 suggests that the new status of sonship is applied to

lsquoyoursquo and we have earlier contended that this is a reference to Gentile believers so on the basis of

the adoption of Gentile believers God sends the Spirit into ldquoour heartsrdquo Jewish-background

believers in Jesus This concurs with 314 that the coming of the Spirit for the Mosaic-covenant sons

of God is inextricably linked to the coming of the universal Messiah and the incoming of the Gentiles

into the new covenant not the old And yet Paul is not arguing that the Jewish-background believers

alone have the Spirit indeed the way he connects and individualises the result in v7 implies the

tight inter-weaving of the benefits of Redemption and Adoption for both Jews and Gentiles in Christ

As a side-note it seems scholarship has put to rest the notion that ldquoAbbardquo = ldquoDaddyrdquo and we can

move on to a more mature relationship though no less intimate and personal with God who has

revealed himself not only as Creator but as Father The impact of v7 should not be missed

recapitulating the analogy from v1 that sonship involves inheritance and so the adoption from

slaves to sons makes us heirs as we have not moved into the minority (ie the temporal economy of

the Law) but into sonship and majority

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

And yet v8 takes a step back to remind the addressees that formerly they did not know God and so

were enslaved ldquoto those that are not by nature godsrdquo There is good cause to correlate lsquothosersquo lsquonot-

godsrsquo in v8 with the lsquoweak and poor elementsrsquo in v9 Paulrsquos argument here is that by their actions

they are betraying their redemption and adoption instead lsquoservingrsquo indeed lsquoslavingrsquo for idols How

do they do so Verse 10 raises the issue in veiled terms the observation of calendric sanctities

whether Sabbath observance andor feast-keeping Judaising practices seem to be in view For

Gentiles this would be the move from redemption from pagan idols to a peculiarly Jewish form of

self-enslavement for Jews it would be a misunderstanding of the shift represented in the coming of

the Messiah and the new covenant In either case Paul expresses his deep concern that his labour

has ultimately been purposeless fruitless to no effect since their actions deny the gospel he has

proclaimed and in this epistle so fiercely defends

412-20

Text 12 Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί δέομαι ὑμῶν οὐδέν με ἠδικήσατεmiddot 13 οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι

διʼ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον 14 καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί

μου οὐκ ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε ἀλλὰ ὡς ἄγγελον θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν 15

ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες

ἐδώκατέ μοι 16 ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν 17 ζηλοῦσιν ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς ἀλλὰ

ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε 18 καλὸν δὲ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε καὶ μὴ

μόνον ἐν τῷ παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς 19 τέκνα μου οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω μέχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν

ὑμῖνmiddot 20 ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄρτι καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν

Translation

12 Become as I because I also [became] as you brothers I beg you You did me no harm 13 You

know that it was on account of [the] weakness of the flesh that I preached-the-gospel to you in the

first instance 14 and you did not despise1 me nor disdain your trial in my flesh but received me as

an angel2 of God as Christ Jesus 15 Where then is your [former] state-of-blessedness For I testify

to you that if able having plucked out your eyes you would have given them to me 16 So I have

become your enemy speaking the truth to you 17 For they are zealous of you not in a good way

but they wish to shut you out so that you might envy them 18 It is good to be sought always in a

good way and not only in my being present with you 19 My children whom I am again giving birth

to until Christ shall be formed in you 20 I wished to be present with you now and to change my

[tone of] voice because I am at a loss in your case

1 more literally spit out a superstitious sign of rejection

2 angel or messenger

Comments

A key question as v12 begins is the lsquowhatrsquo that Paul became The context persuades me that in light

of the preceding discourse about sons slaves and the Law Paulrsquos implication is that he became lsquolike

a Gentile Sinnerrsquo in being freed from the Law In effect he stepped outside the lsquoLaw-experiencersquo

and entered into an entirely new category of existence That realm of existence is Christ who has

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

fulfilled the Law so that this new form of existence is not lsquooutside the Law as transgressionrsquo but

lsquooutside the Law as beyond something rendered obsolete by perfection of its telosrsquo Ultimately

Paulrsquos exhortation rests upon the deeply problematic move of why they would try and step inside

the Law-experience when this is part and parcel of what Christ has set them free from

Paul links his exhortation to the past relationship between himself and the Galatian believers He

mentions in turn that there is no disruption of relationship at least on his part ndash he does not feel

wronged or alienated by them Furthermore he recollects to them the circumstance of his first

coming to them and the occasion of his (relatively) prolonged stay namely some kind of physical

ailment Despite speculation the text and Paul remain silent on its exact nature The focus rather of

Paulrsquos account is on the quality of their reception In v14 he offers a powerful identification in that

to receive Paul insofar as he is an agent of gospel preaching is to receive Christ This accords well

with ambassadorial representation cf for example 2 Corinthians 520

The formerly blessed and beneficent welcome is then contrasted in v15 with their inexplicable

change of conduct Previously the extent of their love for Paul was unbounded now it appears to

have been utterly reversed Paul locates the reason for this not so much in the Galatian believers to

whom he is appealing but in outsiders the Judaisers whom he excludes from both his target

audience and from consideration Essentially Paul is engaging in a rhetorical tactic (and I mean no

disparagement by this only observation) of trying to re-align this group of believers with himself and

the true gospel but disassociating them from the alternate group of teachers whose lsquogospelrsquo Paul

has already rejected and which he perceives to be an abomination that will lead believers to hell

This is not merely or only a theological alignment question but a profoundly personal one Formerly

they showed a deep and personal affection for Paul Paul now raises the compelling question is his

speaking of the truth the basis for their becoming hostile to him The implicit claim is that speaking

truth ought never to be such grounds

In v17 Paul moves back from the personal to the theological but without leaving the personal

behind He highlights the opponentrsquos zeal or desire for the Galatian believers but suggests that it is

not a wholesome one That by apparently lsquoincludingrsquo them by the extension of Mosaic law code

they in effect exclude them so that they become second-tier believers Gentiles who might lsquoenvyrsquo

true-born Jews The outcome of the opponentsrsquo zeal is to deprive these very believers of the benefits

of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Rather Paul says there is a good way to be lsquosoughtrsquo to be desired to be included and this is not

circumscribed by Paulrsquos own physical presence Paul considers given the events in Galatia that he is

again trying to lsquogive birthrsquo to them that Christ may be formed in them The interrupt caused by his

opponents and its grave effects on this group of believers is so severe that Paul depicts his strivings

on their behalf as tantamount to needing to be (re-)converted because of the deficiency of their

grasp on the gospel their willingness and gullibility in being deceived by the false gospel is evidence

that in a real sense Christ is not (fully) formed in them

And so Paul expresses throughout this passage and especially in v20 a real sense of aporia he is at a

loss as to what to do with them how to persuade them why they have been taken in why they

have turned hostile For those who grasp the gospel and its implications there is a profound lsquowhyrsquo

that finds no answer when considering those who turn away or pervert the gospel itself Paulrsquos own

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

personal desire is for physical presence (to deal with this in person) but also to change his tone that

this wasnrsquot a problem he needed to address but he cannot simply ignore or diminish its importance

it must be dealt with

421-51

Text 21 Λέγετέ μοι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε 22 γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι Ἀβραὰμ

δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέραςmiddot 23 ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ

σάρκα γεγέννηται ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας διʼ ἐπαγγελίας 24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμεναmiddot αὗται γάρ

εἰσιν δύο διαθῆκαι μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἁγάρ 25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ

Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων

αὐτῆςmiddot 26 ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστίν ἥτις ἐστὶν μήτηρ ἡμῶνmiddot 27 γέγραπται γάρmiddot

Εὐφράνθητι στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα

ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσαmiddot

ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου

μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα

28 ὑμεῖς δέ ἀδελφοί κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέmiddot 29 ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ σάρκα γεννηθεὶς

ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα οὕτως καὶ νῦν 30 ἀλλὰ τί λέγει ἡ γραφή Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν

υἱὸν αὐτῆς οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσει ὁ υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 31 διό

ἀδελφοί οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας

51 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσενmiddot στήκετε οὖν καὶ μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε 23

Translation

21 Tell me you who wish to be under the Law do you not heed the Law 22 For it is written that

Abraham had two sons one from the slavegirl and one from the free-woman 23 But the one from

the slavegirl is born according to the flesh but the one [born] of the free-woman through promise

24 Which things are allegorical for these are two covenants one from Mount Sinai born unto

slavery which is Hagar 25 And the Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia it corresponds to the present

Jerusalem for she is enslaved with her children 26 But the above-Jerusalem is free which is our

mother 27 for it is written

Rejoice barren woman who does not bear

Burst and cry out woman who does not birth

Because many are the children of the desolate

More than those of she who has a manrdquo24

28 But you brothers are children of promise according to Isaac 29 But just as then the one born

according to the flesh persecuted the one [born] according to the Spirit so also now 30 But what

23 Michael W Holmes The Greek New Testament SBL Edition (Lexham Press 2010) Ga 421ndash51

24 Isa 541

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

does the Scripture say Cast out the slavegirl and her son for the son of the slavegirl will not inherit

with the son of the free25 13 Wherefore brothers we are not children of the slavegirl but of the

free-woman 51 In freedom Christ has set us free stand then and do not again be ensnared to the

yoke of slavery

Comments

Paulrsquos use of what is often called an allegorical reading of the HagarIshmaelIsaac narrative is the

ground for considerable debate and argument Before approaching it it is worth locating his

treatment of it within the flow of the letter itself Just as the previous section ends with Paul

seemingly throwing his hands up in despair Paul again redoubles his efforts to persuade his

audience In v21 Paul lines up his target again Galatian believers who are being swayed to take up

Law-observance He raises a line of argument that cannot be prima facie set aside ndash if they want to

be under the Law they need to listen to the Law itself and so Paulrsquos argument in this section relies

entirely upon uncontroverted Scripture the narrative of Genesis with an interlude from Isaiah

v22 refers to no particular passage of scripture but the narrative of Genesis 16 sets up the situation

Abram having failed to secure a child by his wife Sarai is offered Sarairsquos Egyptian servant Hagar as

a surrogate Hagar bears a son Ishmael but in chapter 17 the reader discovers that such an attempt

to fulfil Godrsquos promise of a son is not Godrsquos plan for the fulfilment and that the line of promise and

the covenant with Abraham will pass to Isaac who will be Sarahrsquos son

So Paul sets up the significant data with the brief statement that Abraham had two sons even

though Genesis 251-6 indicates further children born to Keturah who alternatively is named wife

and concubine For the purposes of the narrative only the two sons Ishmael and Isaac are in view

In v23 Paul offers up what is the key distinction between Ishmael and Isaac at least according to the

narrative here employed Ishmael is born according to the flesh the son of a slavegirl lsquoFleshrsquo here

reads as lsquoin the natural wayrsquo but the contrast is not with lsquospiritualrsquo in an incorporeal sense but with

the child of the promise So the dichotomy set up is between flesh and promise At this point Paul

says these things are lsquoallegoricalrsquo There are X good reasons for understanding Paul to mean

lsquotypologicalrsquo

1 The word lsquoallegoricalrsquo here is probably better translated lsquofigurativersquo Our understanding

of allegory represents a later delineation of figurative language into categories that Paul

probably did not work with Despite Paulrsquos immense learning it seems unlikely that he

was trained in classical rhetoric per se and so the distinction between typology and

allegory is not relevant to understanding what Paul would have meant by lsquoallegoryrsquo

2 Typology is distinct from allegory in two main features Firstly it is grounded in historical

events so that if you change the history the meaning of the figure changes Allegory is

not so bounded ndash if you want to change the meaning of the figure you can change the

story that the allegory rests upon Secondly typology depends upon the historical

narrative already having been given meaning Arguable the narrative of freedom and

25 Gen 2110

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

slavery promise and flesh subsists in the Genesis narrative before Paul provides a

Christocentric interpretation of the same

3 No less a figure than Chrysostom declares that this is typology and that Paul simply

didnrsquot know what he was saying This is an appeal to authority but a worthy one If

anybody understands the difference between typology and allegory itrsquos Chrysostom

A fourth argument which is not really an argument for it being typology but an argument from

mistaken conclusions is that if Paul is using allegory either (a) Paul is using what we consider an

illegitimate exegetical technique (and so either we are wrong or he is wrong) or (b) Paul is using a

legitimate exegetical technique which legitimates allegorical readings for us and basically throws off

the limits The key difference between typology and allegory is precisely that typology is a figurative

reading that has a number of constraints inherent in it which allegory does not

It is at this point in the passage that Paulrsquos manoeuvre seems most audacious He identifies the two

sons with two covenants and the natural lsquolining uprsquo of types here would seem to be Isaac -gt

MosesSinai -gt Law -gt Jewsthe free over against Ishmael -gt not-Jerusalem -gt excluded from Law -gt

Gentilesslaves But this is decidedly not how Paul lines up the patterns here Instead he aligns

Hagar with Mount Sinai slavery Arabia and the present Jerusalem Paulrsquos radical re-ordering of the

figurative reading suggests that physical earthly fleshly Jerusalem because of its Law-obedience

and because of its Christ-rejection is the figurative covenant of slavery This of course picks up the

earlier thrust of the letter that identifies being under the Law as being enslaved to and by the Law

On the other hand the true descendants of Isaac the sons of Abraham are not the physical

descendants of Abraham who show themselves to be slaves by their slavery to the Law but are the

children of promise And as we have seen in chapter 3 it is those lsquoof faithrsquo that are the children of

the promise the children of Abraham Paul establishes now figuratively the superiority and priority

of the promise over the Law and so the free over the slaves This argument is grounded in the Law

and so those who desire to be under the Law ought to listen

Part of the genius of Paulrsquos argument is to make a distinction between physical earthly temporal

Jerusalem which the line of logic might lead one to think should be the one aligned with freedom

and the lsquoJerusalem from aboversquo Rather it is the present temporal Jerusalem that has rejected the

promise rejected the fulfilment of the covenant and so remains under slavery The heirs of promise

and covenant both have been translated to the children of promise the sons of Abraham who are so

by faith

The quotation of Isaiah 541 identifies the Galatian believers as the spiritual offspring promised to

Jerusalem but the figurativespiritual reality of Jerusalem The link here is with Sarahrsquos barrenness

which fits a regular theme of the barren woman who is given a miraculous child (Sarah being but the

first but cf Rebekah in Gen 2521 Rachel in Gen 301 Hannah and typologically speaking Mary)

There is ironic and paradoxical fulfilment that the barren woman produces far more children than

the married fruitful woman

In v28 Paul brings the discussion back to his audience By sympathetically identifying them as

children of promise of the lineage of Isaac (spiritually speaking at the least) he accomplishes two

things Firstly nothing is lacking in their present spiritual condition and so nothing is gained by going

lsquounder the Lawrsquo That measure would not gain them status as children of promise or descendants by

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

covenant incorporation of Isaac Rather it would effect the opposite they would lose their status as

children of promise by becoming instead children of slavery and figuratively speaking would place

themselves outside the line of blessingpromise that reaches back to Isaac Secondly Paul presumes

so as to persuade By identifying them in such a manner he presumes that they will indeed reject

the persuasions of the Judaisers

Going on Paul draws them into the typological circumstance though his means of doing so are not

readily reconcilable with the Genesis narrative According to v29 Ishmael persecuted Isaac and the

same situation obtains today How and where does Ishmael do this It seems likely that Paul is

drawing upon interpretive traditions regarding Gen 21 where Ishmael is said to be lsquolaughingrsquo (Gen

219) This might be taken as some have to mean that Ishmael was lsquomockingrsquo Isaac Alternatively

there is the suggesting that in lsquolaughingrsquo Ishmael is usurping Isaacrsquos place Regardless Paul

understands the circumstances to be an attempt by Ishmael to supplant Isaac and that it

corresponds to the present Galatian situation His response is to creatively draw upon the 2110 the

words of Sarah to Abraham and treat them as an impersonal (read divine) mandate While it would

not be obvious from a reading of the Genesis 21 narrative that this is how they are to be understood

the flow of redemptive history in that book gives them a warrant as part of Godrsquos purpose and plan

which leaves space and blessing for Ishmael but by no means offers him as a partner in the promise

and the covenant ndash it is all through Isaac

So too the Galatians ought to cast out the Judaisers Insofar as Paul applies the figurative meaning

of the narrative the Galatian community of believers should be read of those who are in slavery not

children of promise fleshly and in fact persecuting them Paulrsquos summation in v31 returns again to

the subject of identity but now inclusively lsquowersquo are the children of the free-woman v31 should be

read in conjunction with 51 which picks up the preceding as the basis for its injunction to stand

firm and not submit to slavery No one who is freed desires or should go back to slavery and Paul

sees this as categorical in the case of those liberated by Christ The very goal of that liberation is a

freedom that is to be lived qua freedom and so the desire to return to the Law return to slavery is

antithetical to everything Christ has accomplished

52-12

Text 2 Ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει 3 μαρτύρομαι δὲ

πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι 4 κατηργήθητε

ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε 5 ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ πίστεως

ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα 6 ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ πίστις διʼ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη

7 Ἐτρέχετε καλῶςmiddot τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 8 ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος

ὑμᾶς 9 μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ 10 ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν κυρίῳ ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο

φρονήσετεmiddot ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει τὸ κρίμα ὅστις ἐὰν ᾖ 11 ἐγὼ δέ ἀδελφοί εἰ περιτομὴν

ἔτι κηρύσσω τί ἔτι διώκομαι ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ σταυροῦ 12 ὄφελον καὶ

ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Translation

2 Look ndash I Paul say to you that if you were to be circumcised Christ will benefit you nothing 3 I

testify again to every circumcised man that he is a debtor to do the whole law 4 You are severed

from Christ you whoever are justified by law you have fallen from grace 5 For we by Spirit ndash by

faith ndash expectantly await the hope of righteousness 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails

anything nor uncircumcision but faith working operating through love

7 You were running well who cut in on you that you not obey the truth 8 The persuasion is not of

the one calling you 9 A little leaven leavens the whole batch-of-dough 10 I am persuaded for you in

the Lord that you will think nothing otherwise but the one disturbing you will bear the punishment

whoever it is 11 But I brothers if I yet preach circumcision why am I still persecuted Then the

offence of the cross would be annulled 12 I wish even that those troubling you would be cut off

Comments

A sharp break with the preceding section is not present but Paul does shift language and the

slaveryfreedom discourse falls away as he moves to more direct engagement The commencement

of verse 2 ldquoLook ndash I Paul say to yourdquo disrupts the flow of reading and re-engages the reader and

personalises the following statement Paul is again addressing these Galatian believers and begins

to lay out the consequences if they were to follow the teachings of the Judaisers Verse 2 states this

in the strongest terms ldquoChrist will benefit you nothingrdquo The solemnity of this statement is

reinforced by a repetition and expansion in v3 with Paulrsquos ldquoI testifyrdquo strengthening the gravity of the

statement The phrase ldquoevery circumcised manrdquo here is probably best understood as referring to

those currently uncircumcised Gentile-background believers who are considering circumcision

Circumcision in those circumstances is an entrance ritual the beginning of a whole life as a member

of the Mosaic covenant and so a whole life of legal observance For those who were circumcised

ie Jewish-background believers like Paul the dynamic is different ndash they were under Law but now

have been set free by Christ For those who were never circumcised in this situation circumcision is

a mark that they are going from freedom in Christ to slavery under Law and so they will become

debtors obligated to complete the whole Law just as the Jewish believers had been

There is a mini-chiasm in v4 with the subjects nested in the middle clause ldquoyou whoever are

justified by lawrdquo Paul has already established the impossibility of justification by law and so the

phrase should be understood here as ldquothose currently trying to be justified by lawrdquo These people

Paul says are ldquosevered from Christrdquo and ldquohave fallen from gracerdquo It is a total rejection of the Gospel

to re-embrace the Law and Paul vividly paints the implications in terms of being cut-off or separated

from Christ (a relational-union aspect) and falling from grace

In v5 Paul shifts from ldquoyourdquo to ldquowerdquo aligning himself and those readers who either hold his position

or are persuaded by it over against those seeking circumcision and Law-observance The double lsquobyrsquo

prepositions are hard to adequately translate into English shifting from a plain dative πνεύματι to

the prepositional ἐκ πίστεως The former might better be rendered lsquoin the Spiritrsquo but the meaning is

substantially the same Both modify the experiential reality of waiting The waiting has as its object

lsquohopersquo but all waiting could be said to have a certain lsquohopersquo as its object lsquoRighteousnessrsquo is the

substantive object of the hope ie they are awaiting righteousness This certainly holds a

futurejudgment orientation as is also possible implied back in v2 with its future ldquowill availrdquo

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Finally v6 concludes a statement of who the Galatians are giving the reason for the expectant

waiting that occurs lsquoby faithrsquo At first glance it seems paradoxical that Paul can relativise circumcision

and uncircumcision saying that neither makes a difference when he has spent so much time

arguing against circumcision But it is the very context of circumcision that makes the meaning For

the Judaisers circumcision is the beginning of life as a member of the Mosaic covenant and Galatian

believers undergoing circumcision enter into a re-Judaised pattern of life But the very status of

physical circumcision itself matters nothing in Christ Nor does to extend it onersquos prior status of

being circumcised or uncircumcised a Jew or a Gentile matter ldquoin Christ Jesusrdquo The absolute

irrelevancy of circumcision provides us with the understanding of how Paul could have Timothy

circumcised in Acts 163 not as the beginning of a life of Law observance but as a physical

concession to allow Timothy to be like Paul a Jew to the Jews But here the act of circumcision is

invested with much more salvific significance To become circumcised under these circumstances

functions as a denial of the gospel

What does count Paul insists is ldquofaith operating through loverdquo ldquoExpressingrdquo might be a better

translation for the meaning While ldquofaithrdquo is the foundational principle it must be expressed

executed in living and the manner and means of that execution is ldquoloverdquo The shape of that love

Paul will take up a little further but it is a faith-fuelled life of loving that matters not the status of

circumcision or not

In v7 Paul changes tack a little He returns to an appeal to his readers He reminds them first of their

previous response and progress ie lsquorunning wellrsquo And contrasts that with the current situation

that someone has lsquocut in onrsquo them my translation preserves a movement motif rather than a more

typical lsquohinderedrsquo In any case the question is rhetorical as it is clear lsquowhorsquo these hinderers are but

Paul identifies them by their result ndash they have restricted or stopped them from obeying the truth

that is the truth of the gospel This lsquopersuasionrsquo ie the act andor content aimed at persuading

them away from the truth does not have its origin in him who calls them The present lsquocallsrsquo may

focus our attention on the ongoing calling of God rather than a singular act in the past

v9 appears to be proverbial in nature but is not found as a set proverb elsewhere It has parallels

perhaps in Mt 1333 Lk 1321 In any case it is an illustrative proverb taking the reality of the work

of a small amount of yeast through a whole lump of bread and applying it to the realm of thought

and persuasion While this teaching regarding Judaisation of believers seems small it is significantly

threatening the whole Galatian church[es] Despite this appearance Paul remains persuaded (note

the play between v8 and v10 on persuasion) that they will not adopt this teaching but lsquothink

nothing otherwisersquo ndash ie hold no doctrines in a manner alternative to the orthodoxy that Paul has

taught This alternative gospel will not ultimately prevail rather its purveyor will face (final)

judgement The reference lsquowhoever it isrsquo is probably not to personal ignorance on Paulrsquos part but

rather to an irrelevancy of the prominence or prestige of that figure or those figures

Next Paul addresses what sounds like an allegation against him or at least a statement of hearsay

that he himself still lsquopreaches circumcisionrsquo It would certainly have helped the Judaizersrsquo cause if

they alluded or stated that Paul himself taught circumcision in the sense that they did Paul raises

the question which rests on the following logic If A then not-B B therefore not-A If Paul were

preaching circumcision he would not face persecution ie his preaching would be a form of Judaism

that would fit in with both contemporary Judaism and within the accommodated settlement that

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Judaism had in the Roman Empire It is likely given the next statement that Paul probably has

persecution and pressure from fellow Jews in mind The offence of the cross has both Jewish and

Gentile aspects but in this letter that scandal or offence is more directly related to the Jewish

context The lsquooffence of the crossrsquo here holds the very idea that the Cross not initiation into old

covenant membership and Law-keeping as means of righteousness is the way of salvation For those

prioritising the old covenant and circumcision as the means of entering into it the Cross is always a

stumbling block as seen in the bulk of chapters 3-4 If Paul preached circumcision he would not

preach the Cross in terms of salvation by grace through faith he would relativise it to the Mosaic

covenant

Others translate v12 in a more forceful sense and give the middle-tense a more reflexive force eg

ldquoWould that these agitators castrate themselvesrdquo There is no doubt about the forcefulness of Paulrsquos

words and the play upon lsquocut offrsquo Paulrsquos desire is then dual First a real desire that these troublers

agitators disturbers would be separated from the community of faith and secondly a not-too-

subtle suggestion that if they went further than circumcision to self-mutilation or self-emasculation

they would in fact be truly cut off in terms of the OT Law since this would exclude them from the

worshipping community Paulrsquos words are fighting words as he finishes up a section in which he has

gone head to head with these agitators and sought to show how their devastating teaching is

lsquoanother gospelrsquo which is totally emptied of salvific value and so lsquono gospel at allrsquo and in doing so

made heartfelt appeals to the Galatian believers not to be swaying or persuaded into following this

destructive teaching

513-26

Text 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε ἀδελφοίmiddot μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί

ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοιςmiddot 14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται ἐν τῷmiddot

Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν 15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε βλέπετε μὴ ὑπʼ

ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε

16 Λέγω δέ πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε 17 ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ

τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε

ταῦτα ποιῆτε 18 εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε οὐκ ἐστὲ ὑπὸ νόμον 19 φανερὰ δέ ἐστιν τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός

ἅτινά ἐστιν πορνεία ἀκαθαρσία ἀσέλγεια 20 εἰδωλολατρία φαρμακεία ἔχθραι ἔρις ζῆλος θυμοί

ἐριθεῖαι διχοστασίαι αἱρέσεις 21 φθόνοι μέθαι κῶμοι καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν

καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν

22 Ὁ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη χαρά εἰρήνη μακροθυμία χρηστότης ἀγαθωσύνη

πίστις 23 πραΰτης ἐγκράτειαmiddot κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος 24 οἱ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν σάρκα

ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις 25 εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν 26 μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦντες

Textual Criticism

v24 adding Ἰησοῦ after Χριστοῦ although the balance of evidence is uncertain

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Translation

13 For you have been called for freedom brothers only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh

but serving through love one another 14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word in Love

your neighbour as yourself 15 But if you bite and devour one another see that you are not

destroyed by one another

16 But I say walk by spirit and do not complete the lust of flesh 17 For the flesh desires

contrary to the spirit but the spirit contrary to the flesh for these are opposed to one another

so that the things you donrsquot even will these very things you do 18 But if you are led by spirit

you are not under law 19 As the works of the flesh are manifest which are porneia

uncleanness licentiousness 20 idolatry sorcery hostilities strife jealousy passions

selfishnesses dissensions factions 21 envies drunknesses orgies and the things like to

these 21 which I pronounced to you just as I said earlier that those doing these things will

not inherit the kingdom of God

22 For the fruit of the spirit is love joy peace long-suffering kindness goodness faith 23

humility self-control against such things is no law 24 But those of Christ [Jesus] crucified

the flesh with its passions and lusts 25 if we live by spirit let us also conform to the spirit 26

Do not become vainglorious provoking one another envying one

Comments

v13 Just as 51 indicates that we are liberated for freedom v13 renews this idea with For you

were called for freedom Paul having rebuked them in the first half of this chapter renews the

call to gospel-shaped living which in Galatians is specifically shaped by freedom in the

Gospel from the Law and in renewing that call here he goes on to ethical teaching that is

grounded in the Christs redemption of us from both sin and law

This vocation to freedom is negatively categorised as not as a pretext for the flesh Here Paul

draws us to the ready distinction between licence and liberty It would be easy to mistake the

freedom the gospel delivers us into as a freedom to indulge our flesh Indeed the history of

the church has seen many such heresies and in our own lives we can be prone to such

thinking If grace has set me free why not sin Pauls point is that this is a misreading of

liberty Liberty is always characterised both by freedom from and freedom to Freedom in

Christ is exactly freedom from sin and its attendants and freedom to worship serve love

rightly for the first time To be free from sin only to serve sin in the flesh is not freedom at

all it is merely the pretext the form of freedom Instead Paul tells us that the freedom is that

you serve (slave) one another through love That Paul can readily employ δουλεύετε the

verbal form corresponding to δοῦλος slave in such close connection to his freedom

language reveals how complex the thought about freedom here is Freedom to be a slave

And yet willingly freely we choose to do this and so our service is characterised is

conducted through love So absent is the idea of compulsion here from the concept of

slaving

[note the links of brother ndash 61 and then one another to 62 then πληρόω in 514 cf ἀναπληρόω

in 62 σεαυτον cf 61 structural links

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

v14 Paulrsquos teaching here picks up and echoes Jesusrsquo own teaching on the two great commandments

(Matthew 2235-40) and we should not be surprised at this In context Paul is linking his injunction

to serve one another in love with the OT teaching of loving onersquos neighbour But Paul is doing more

than this he is giving this as a summary statement for the whole law

This isnrsquot to be read as Paul overriding the other lsquogreatrsquo commandment ie Love the Lord your God

with all your heart and mind and soul Rather as his focus here is on the community relations of

believers of their lsquoone-anotherrsquo ethical comportment so too he takes the aspect of what is not so

much two commandments as a double-commandment and applies it here In light of Paulrsquos earlier

teaching on the Law we see that there is indeed a positive and continuing place for the Law but

note carefully Paulrsquos choice of lsquois fulfilledrsquo Even the moral use of the law is fulfilled summarily in

something like a teleological reading ndash this was the goal of the Law to promote neighbour love

v15 While this is both the call of freedom and the goal of the law it is not the reality of relations

among Galatian believers While technically a first class conditional leaving open ended whether the

antecedent is true or not the context of Paulrsquos writing seems to be that this at least is some kind of

issue in the church Instead of serving there is lsquobitingrsquo and lsquodevouringrsquo graphic metaphors for a way

of life that is parasitic and cannibalistic upon each other Paulrsquos lsquosee thatrsquo functions imperatively

almost to lsquolimitrsquo this behaviour at the point of mutual destruction Paulrsquos words function rather as a

warning ndash this kind of internal community strife will rip the community asunder

v16 in the mild contrast of ldquoBut I sayrdquo Paul offers an alternative Here is a way out from mutually-

devastating community-destroying behaviour The way out is to walk ie conduct onersquos life in the

sphere or realm of the spirit instead of accomplishing and bringing to fulfilment the fleshrsquos lust In

this and the verses that follow Paul outlines a spiritflesh conflict but it is not the same as that of

Romans 2 In 17a itrsquos very clear that Spirit and Flesh are opposed to each other but the construction

of ldquothe things you donrsquot even will [to do] these very things you dordquo is not a re-run (well a pre-run

given the dating of the letters) of Romans 7 ndash the ego that cannot do what is right No Galatians is

more radical in a sense in that the ego the ldquoIrdquo itself does nothing The Spirit is at work in the sphere

of the spirit the Flesh is at work in the realm of the flesh There is no independent self that is lsquoyoursquo

You never do what lsquoyoursquo want but what the sphere yoursquore in wants either Spirit or Flesh

v18 However in keeping with Paulrsquos earlier arguments being led by the Spirit precisely removes one

from being lsquounderrsquo the Law Being in the Spirit is thus aligned with the freedom language Those

controlled by the flesh are still under Law and so under condemnation And here Paul begins to

make explicit the typical acts of the flesh in the list of v19-21 The list is notable particularly for how

frequently relational and communal vices make an appearance ndash hostilities strife jealousy

selfishness dissensions factions envies these are all primarily relational sins Even drunkenness

orgies and the earlier sexual sins can be considered under their relational dimensions

And yet the list is not an imperatival list not a ldquodonrsquot do this itrsquos badrdquo categorisation but a

descriptive indication saying ldquothis is what those who live in the sphere of the flesh act outrdquo The

application is not ldquodonrsquot do these thingsrdquo but more foundationally ldquodonrsquot live in the fleshrdquo

v21 I take the first verb in a spatial sense ldquoI pronounce before yourdquo but the second in a

temporal sense referring to Paulrsquos earlier teachings The conclusion Paul brings is that living

in the flesh ultimately excludes from the Kingdom Why Itrsquos an evidence a proof that the

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

work of salvation by grace was not actually at work did not exist Those liberated by Christ

from the realm of fleshlaw ought to see the Spirit at work spiritually for service through

love to others Where that is ultimately lacking salvation will be absent

In stark contrast to the vice list Paul offers the lsquofruitrsquo list Others have well noted that lsquofruitrsquo

is singular here Paul is not providing a pick-and-choose list I want to draw attention to

something else though ndash this is not a list of virtuous action unlike the vice list The list of the

deeds of the flesh is contrasted with a list of qualities or attributes not actions We should

also note the strong references to the first three terms - love joy peace ndash in John 14-17

again echoes of Jesusrsquo own teaching With respect to lsquoself-controlrsquo it was the aim of secular

pagan philosophy but one that is unattainable without the Spirit Regarding lsquohumilityrsquo it is

again noted that this was no virtue outside the Christian faith Paul sums up his list with

ldquoagainst such things there is no lawrdquo as if to say lsquoyou wonrsquot violate the Law if you live out of

the Spiritrsquo Spirit-living does not oppose the Law but being liberated from the Law it actually

fulfils the goal of the Law

Vv24-26 round out this section with Paulrsquos strong image in v24 of those who belong to

Christ having crucified the flesh Drawing upon the death of Christ himself our flesh-nature

has died with Christ there on the cross since that is the locus not only of our redemption but

of our radical change of living Our flesh died there with its passions and lusts so that flesh

is dead Thus v25 contrasts the deadness of the flesh with life Since we died in Christ on the

cross we do now live by the Spirit And the corollary is that being made alive having life by

the Spirit ought to issue in a life lived in conformity to that very same Spirit This is in every

way opposite of the vainglorious relationally destructive way of life characterised by the

flesh and being enacted in the Galatian community

61-10

Text 61 Ἀδελφοί ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε

τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος σκοπῶν σεαυτόν μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς 2 ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη

βαστάζετε καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσετε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν

φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόνmiddot 4 τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ

καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον 5 ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον φορτίον βαστάσει

6 Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς 7 μὴ πλανᾶσθε θεὸς οὐ

μυκτηρίζεταιmiddot ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο καὶ θερίσειmiddot 8 ὅτι ὁ σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ

ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν ὁ δὲ σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον 9 τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι 10 ἄρα οὖν ὡς

καιρὸν ἔχομεν ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Translation

1 Brothers if a person be detected in some transgression you who spirit-people restore such a one

in a spirit of gentleness keeping watch on yourself lest also you are tempted 2 The burdens of one

another bear and thus fulfil the law of Christ 3 For if someone seems to be something being

nothing they deceive themself 4 Let each person put their own work to the test and then only unto

themself alone he has an object of pride and not unto the other [person] 5 For each will bear his

own load 6 Let the one being instructed in the word share with the instructor in all good things 7

Do not be deceived God is not mocked For whatever a person sows this also they will reap 8

Because the one sowing unto their own flesh from the flesh will reap destruction but the one

sowing unto the spirit from the spirit will reap life eternal 9 Let us not become weary doing the

good for in the proper time being unwearied we will reap 10 So then as we have occasion let us

do the good to all yet especially towards the members of the household of faith

Comments

Building on what Paul has just been writing concerning community life v1 shows community life in

action In the case where someone in the community has some aspect of sin come to life the other

believers (you spirit-people often translated as ldquoyou who are spiritualrdquo but the force of

πνευματικοὶ has less to do with more lsquospiritualrsquo than others and rather more connection with

simply being people who are indwelt and transformed by the Spirit) are to restore that person ie

undertake a process of spiritual rehabilitation to help the sinner overcome their sin This in particular

is to be done with a ldquospirit of gentlenessrdquo tender consciences are generally to be treated gently not

with harshness And furthermore with vigilance so that responsibility to care for sinning brothers

and sisters is matched with accountability to watch over oneself

This community care is broadened into a more general principle in v2 with the call to bear one

anotherrsquos burdens This is framed as fulfilling the law of Christ Again as part of Paulrsquos radical re-

situation of the Law of Moses the Law of Christ functions to replace any notion of Law as Moral

Standard even as Paul himself employs the Law of Moses as part of his ground-source of ethical

material

Our understanding of v3 in part hinges upon whether we understand δοκεῖ in the sense of lsquoseemrsquo (as

per our translation) or lsquothinkrsquo (taking a reflexive meaning ndash seems to themselves) While in our

translation we have preserved some element of ambiguity the following ldquothey deceive themselvesrdquo

indicates that the lsquoseemingrsquo cuts both ways As a community or a family does not engage in other-

deception within the community false evaluation of oneself is both self- and other- deception and

has no place in this community Instead of this practice of deception and comparison we have v4 ndash a

call to self-appraisal (and honest appraisal) of onersquos own deeds The arena of lsquoboastingrsquo or perhaps

less prejudicially lsquopride-takingrsquo is in relation to onersquos own deeds and before God not in relation to

others and their deeds

How does this fit into broader teaching about not boasting and boasting only in the Lord We take it

that in light of an honest self-appraisal before God a person may have a sense of lsquojob well donersquo

neither a grounds for pride before God nor of self-promotion in the presence of others but rather

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

satisfaction in the Lord The Christian life is not one of endless self-despisal and deprecation as

some have mistaken it

Verse 5 suggests some unity to the mini-unit of 2-5 though the word for load differs from that for

burden in v2 Most commentators thus suggest a different meaning given that v2 calls for bearing

one anotherrsquos and v5 calls for a shouldering of onersquos own But is φορτίον automatically more

bearable than τὰ βάρη A burden does not necessarily imply that it is unmanageable and in

different circumstances what was a load can become a burden and vice versa Our capacity to bear

the difficulties of life varies based not only on those difficulties but our very selves and the

community around us

Paulrsquos injunction then may be seen as a non-reciprocal command or an expectation of non-

reciprocity ldquoI for my part try to bear my own load and have a sharp eye out to help carry otherrsquosrdquo

Such a pro-active ethic of taking on onersquos own responsibilities and othersrsquo echoes the pro-active

version of the Golden Rule of Jesus = an ethic that is not first grounded in expectation of reciprocity

may in fact provoke grace all the more

Reading vv2-5 as a whole we see that Paul turns the whole lsquoboastingrsquo game on its head Against a

cultural world in which boasting was an extra-familial affair and the place that isnrsquot for boasting is

the home Paulrsquos communitarian ethic establishes the church as that kind of place ndash a place not fit

for boasting Boasting and honour-games within the family have no place And yet outside this new

community we boast in the cross the most shameful object in the ancient world O Christians glory

in their shame to steal Paulrsquos words from Phil 219 and turn them on their head

In verse 6 the focus shifts to the relation between teachers and the taught Specifically Paul has in

mind instruction ldquoin the wordrdquo ie teaching of the Word of God as revealed in the Scriptures and

focused on the Gospel While verse 6 itself seems to centre on those who are being instructed the

following verses may be read with particular application to those doing the teaching Although it has

been typical to read these verses as a set of more generic moral exhortations their application to

teachers of the Word is worth pondering

Verse 7 then gives us a series of three statements

Do not be deceived

(why In what regard) God is not mocked

(Grounds) For whatever a person sows this also they will reap

Paul has already made reference to self-deception in verse 3 Seeing truly is a basis for right action

and in this case it is having a right understanding of the relationship between act (sowing) and effect

(reaping) In particular we are to have a right understanding of how our actions within the

community (and without) interact with God It is a deceived person who things that God can be

mocked and the consequences will not be negative Paul then moves to the more general principle

lsquowhat is sowed will be reapedrsquo

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

This general principle is elaborated and specified in verse 8 The possible options are dichotomised

(compare Paulrsquos approach to flesh and spirit in chapter 5) into flesh and spirit with the attendant

consequences destruction and eternal life

For the teacher of the Word this raises specific questions of application how are you investing in the

community Is your teaching (as sowing) in accordance with the Spirit and directed towards

producing eternal consequences Or is it according to flesh and directed towards fleshly gain (but

then ultimately destruction) The same questions can be asked more generally of the community

but with reference to teaching

Verse 9 goes on to exhort perseverance in Christian life but perhaps in the ministry of the Word in

particular for it is a wearying profession (cf 2 Cor 41 16) Where do those in ministry gain their

support and sustenance Is it not in the mutual bearing of burdens of the community the sharing of

good things from those instructed the community of love that is to exist within the Spirit-people of

Christ

Verse 10 helps emphasise the focus in this section on the engagement of the community within

itself though not necessarily only to itself Firstly we note the phrase ldquoas we have occasionrdquo ndash not a

restriction to lessen the possibility of doing good to only when circumstances arise in which it is

possible but rather a promotion of the very possibility of doing good Secondly lsquoto allrsquo is probably to

be understood as lsquoall without distinctionrsquo rather than lsquoall without exceptionrsquo (the latter being our

natural tendency for lsquoallrsquo but the usage of πᾶς aligns better the former) Some are wont to read

μάλιστα δὲ as ldquonamelyrdquo in place of ldquoespeciallyrdquo which would act to restrict the scope of this

injunction to the church community This translation seems indefensible to me but neither is this

verse a proof text for the broader scope of the churchrsquos ministry of good deeds and social justice in

the world The Scriptures build a strong enough case for an ethos of mercy and justice more broadly

and in other passages there is no need to rest it on this slender pillar Rather verse 10 functions to

summarise the call to right action within the community without distinction and beyond

611-18

Text 11 Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί 12 ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί

οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μὴ διώκωνταιmiddot 13 οὐδὲ

γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν ἀλλὰ θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι ἵνα ἐν τῇ

ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται 14 ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ διʼ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται κἀγὼ κόσμῳ 15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε

ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ

ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

17 Τοῦ λοιποῦ κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματί μου

βαστάζω

18 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν ἀδελφοίmiddot ἀμήν

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Translation

11 See with what large letters I write to you by my own hand 12 As many as wish to make a good

showing in flesh [they are] those compelling you to be circumcised only so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christ 13 For the circumcised themselves do not keep Law but wish you

to be circumcised so that in your flesh they might boast 14 May it not be that I should boast except

in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom the world have been crucified to me and I to the

world 15 For circumcision is not something nor uncircumcision but a new creation 16 And as many

as hold to this canon peace be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God

17 Finally let no one cause troubles to me For I bear the scars of Jesus in my body

18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with your spirit brothers Amen

Comments

We come now to the final verses of the letter Despite colourful suggestions for verse 11 the plain

meaning is difficult to overturn ndash that Paul now personally writes with large letters ie Paul himself

is writing the original autograph at this point and his own handwriting is distinctive and larger than

whatever secretary he is employing and this is a sign of authenticity Does the aorist need any

particular explanation I wouldnrsquot think so

In verse 12 then Paul begins a recapitulation of the dominant conflict his epistle has engages in By

identifying the group firstly as lsquoas many as wish to make a good showing in the fleshrsquo Paul continues

his polemic strategy He expresses an interpretive baseline understanding of their actions (the desire

for public acceptance and reputation) and then subjoins this with the defining clause lsquothey are the

ones compelling you to be circumcisedrsquo The third clause gives their purpose but by preceding this

with μόνον he qualifies it entirely so that this is their whole goal in doing so that they might not be

persecuted by the cross of Christrsquo Their purpose is ultimately about their own avoidance of

suffering in the public sphere not about those they compel to be circumcised lsquoby the cross of Christrsquo

here should not be understood as the means or instrument of persecution by any means but is

causal (one might translate lsquofor the cross of Christrsquo personally I would express it as something like

ldquothrough the fact of their allegiance to the reality of the cross of Christ as shorthand for the counter-

world message of the gospelrdquo) Paul characterises them as self-centered in their desires

Is the οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι of v13 middle or passive I have translated simply lsquothe circumcisedrsquo

referring neither to lsquothose that have been circumcisedrsquo or lsquothose that circumcise themselvesrsquo

because the whole point of the Judaising group is to convince Gentile-background believers to

become circumcised so that they are effectively Jewish-proselytes By subsuming their Gentile

background into a Jewish identity they remove the scandal of the cross and form one new

community of Jewish believers in the Messiah not the one new community of Jews and Gentiles

who follow the Messiah It is from this view a moot point whether the participle is taken as middle

or passive since those who receive circumcision are by so doing entering the community of those

who practice circumcision among themselves

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

Nonetheless Paulrsquos overall identification of this group is as a third party to which his Galatian

addresses are not (yet) beholden) His critique at this point is their failure to keep the Law We have

already traced Paulrsquos argument throughout Galatians that keeping Law qua Law is doomed to failure

is the cause of Curse upon those who fail and is a theological and salvation-historical misstep for

Gentile background believers to undertake Here he simply reiterates that they fail to keep it which

is damning since their whole case is built upon the attempt to keep it Despite this hypocrisy Paul

writes they desire these Gentile-background believers to be circumcised which is equivalent to

entering into the Mosaic covenant and proselyte Jews and so committing to keeping the Law again

not for the sake of these lsquoconvertsrsquo but for the sake of this Judaising party It would add to the

prestige influence dominance and so lsquorightnessrsquo of the Judaising position

In contrast Paul presents his own position in the same terms that is in terms of the basis for his

claim to honour and status For Paul in v14 there is no basis for such a claim ldquoexcept the cross of

our Lord Jesus Christrdquo The introductory ldquomay it not berdquo has both genuine optative force ndash it

expresses Paulrsquos desire in the matter but it may also be seen as an expression here that contrasts

the whole of Paulrsquos platform in contrast to the Judaisers Whereas their ground of boasting is the

Law as Mosaic covenant and winning converts to that Paulrsquos ground of boasting is the cross as

metonym for the salvific event of the death of Jesus But the relative clause that follows must

further qualify our reading of this claim ldquothrough which I have been crucified to the world and the

world to merdquo Firstly while οὗ may strictly look back to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ or σταυρῷ the latter seems

far more likely Secondly while it overwhelmingly true that claiming the shameful death of the cross

as the grounds of boasting is itself an inversion of the whole honour-shame schema the relative

clause actually goes further Glorying in what is shameful (the cross) is inversion but when Paul adds

the relative clause it means that in the honour-game of Greco-Roman society Paul has exited the

game with a null score It is the ultimate failure and the ultimate zero But complementing this the

world has been crucified to Paul ndash in Paulrsquos eyes the world itself has been brought to absolute

nothing

This is not to say that the honour-shame dimension is the only one operating here rather I am

highlighting that this is the end of the game for both sides Paul no longer contests in the worldrsquos

honour-games and Paul no longer cares anything for those honour-games that continue in the

world26

More broadly Paulrsquos claim continues the theme explored elsewhere of being co-crucified with

Christ Paul represents his union with Christ as one of union with him in his death and that co-

crucifixion effects Paulrsquos translation from the realm of the world and all its values while the world as

a systematic entity opposed to God is entirely dead to Paul In this claim Paul is paradigmatic for the

believer in general

Verse 15 strikes a resonance with 56 and reminds us that in a letter in which Paul rails so fiercely

against those pressing for and those desiring to undergo circumcision that it is not the actual fact

or state of circumcision that is the issue Indeed when we read this against Acts 163 Paulrsquos extreme

relativisation of the practice of circumcision lays bare the theological rationale that informs both his

attitude here and there

26 I do not mean lsquogamesrsquo here as if there are actual games I simply mean that the conduct of humans in competing for accumulating defending and attacking honour may be understood overall as a lsquogamersquo

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

This is borne out by the verse One could re-arrange it as three propositions

Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

Non-Circumcision is not a lsquothingrsquo

The fact of a new creating is a lsquothingrsquo

What hangs on τί in this verse I would suggest that Paul here is using a compact expression to

indicate something like ldquoa reality worthy of considerationrdquo This is why the actual physical status of

being circumcised or not doesnrsquot matter one whit and why Timothy can be circumcised because it

doesnrsquot matter and why Gentile-background believers can remain uncircumcised because it doesnrsquot

matter and so on What does matter The reality of the new creation It is not immediately clear

whether this should be read as individual or as humanity or as universe but my inclination is

towards the later There is a universal-in-scope new creation new reality coming-into-being through

the coming of the Messiah and its sweeping scope radically alters the conditions of absolutely

everything not least the relationship of believers to God no longer exclusively through the Mosaic

covenant but through Jesus Christ

Once this reality is grasped what circumcision matters becomes apparent In the Galatian context

circumcision signifies an embrace of the Law as law and so a failure to understand the significance

and consequence of the new creation Whereas in Acts 16 the unimportance of physical circumcision

at all renders the choice to circumcise Timothy understandable ndash it doesnrsquot signify re-embrace of the

Mosaic Law as Law at all but a concession for the sake of removing stumbling blocks

Verse 16 begins to transition into a closing blessing The initial relative indefinite ldquoas many asrdquo refers

to those who hold to this ldquocanonrdquo (rule I just preferred to hold on to the archaising lsquocanonrsquo in my

translation) What is this lsquocanonrsquo Most readily it should be understood as the principle expressed in

verse 15 which represents in a very fundamental and compressed form one of the underlying tenets

of Paulrsquos theology To grasp this rule is to grasp the singular gospel of Paulrsquos preaching looking back

to his bombastic opening in 16-9 So it is those people who receive the blessing of peace and mercy

What then of the construction ldquoandeven upon the Israel of Godrdquo There are two intertwined

questions (1) who is the lsquoIsrael of Godrsquo (2) is this group co-terminous with lsquohowever many hold to

this canonrsquo (thus shaping the translation of καί

Despite the emphasis that I have maintained upon JewGentile distinctions within Paulrsquos addressing

of usyou within this letter Paulrsquos theological drive is to represent JBBs and GBBs as one new

humanity united in the Messiah under a covenant and set of promises that precedes the Mosaic Law

and sees Gentiles as incorporated into the Abrahamic promises This in keeping with the sense of

ldquoall Israelrdquo in Romans 9 and the thoughts expressed by Romans 96 and 1126 leads me to conclude

that the Israel of God here is synonymous with the (newly constituted) people of God

The phrase Τοῦ λοιποῦ is a standard way of entering into a concluding section Here that section is

quite short Paul gives an injunction followed by the reason In an epistle shaped primarily by the

conflict with Judaisers over and about the Galatian churches Paul expresses the injunction that no

one should lsquocause him troublesrsquo or perhaps in a more vernacular strain ldquogive him griefrdquo The

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them

grounds are expressed simply as ldquoI bear the scars of Jesus in my bodyrdquo But what on earth is Paul

talking about

Firstly we can easily lay aside importing back any modern connotations of stigmata into this verse

Paul uses the words to indicate scars or marks caused upon his body and the reference is likely two-

fold One he refers the physical sufferings he has endured as a slave of Christ as a mark of his

allegiance to and participation in the sufferings of the Christ Two the marks indicate his possession

as a slave owned by his master Indeed these two references are one and the same thing for Paul ndash

his sufferings are the mark that he is a slave who belongs to Christ and they are thus the proof of

that allegiance

In stark contrast to the nothingness of circumcision and non-circumcision these physical marks do

lsquomeanrsquo something ndash they indicate Paulrsquos clear position as both slave and so also representative of

Jesus (cf the argument through chapters 1-2)

Finally Paul closes with a benediction verse 18 The grace of the opening benediction (13) is

repeated though without the elaborations of the introduction ldquowith your spiritrdquo substitutes in for

the more common ldquowith yourdquo but without much change in meaning Paulrsquos letter closes with the

confirmatory lsquoAmenrsquo his hearty affirmation of all that he has said and most of all his prayerful

declaration of grace to them