Introductory Notes
The Writer
Paul, a Roman name meaning "little," always used by the apostle himself, cp. 2 Peter 3:15, was also called Saul, a Hebrew name meaning "asked for." It is possible he bore both from childhood; at any rate, it was not unusual for one man to bear a Jewish and a Gentile name, cp. Simon Peter, Matthew 10:2; Jesus Justus, Colossians 4:11. In this case, however, the two are never so joined. The Hebrew name appears for the last, the Gentile name for the first time in Acts 13:9.
It is not possible to fix with certainty the dates of Paul's birth, conversion, and death, but 1 b.c., a.d. 32 and 67, respectively, may be taken as approximating closely to them. He would thus be slightly younger than the Lord Jesus, Who was born from four to eight years before the account called Anno Domini. Paul was born at Tarsus in Cilicia, Acts 21:39, and was probably executed at Rome. If these dates are even approximately correct, he must have been a little over fifty years old, and must have had about twenty years' experience in missionary work, when he wrote his Epistle to the Galatians. See also comment on 1 Thessalonians.
Galatia and Galatians
These terms were used in two senses, one official, one popular. The Galatians proper originally belonged to migratory Celtic tribes which, early in the third century b.c., invaded Greece from the north. A considerable host of these separated from the main body and, about 280 b.c., crossed over into what is now known as Asia Minor, in the center of which they established themselves. In the apostolic age, "Galatians" and "Galatia" were still popularly used for this people (with the substratum of native Phrygians whom they had subdued), and for that part of the country in which they had settled.
A hundred years after their settlement in Asia Minor, the Galatians themselves were conquered by the Romans, 189 b.c., with Galatia ultimately becoming a Roman province. Its boundaries were defined in 25 b.c., but were again and again enlarged, and in a.d. 41, were extended southward to include Derbe and the adjacent territory. Thus, the terms were used officially to designate far more than the original Galatian country and people, for the population of Derbe, Lystra, and Iconium were Lycaonians, and those of Pisidian Antioch were Phrygians.
The southern part of the Roman province was the more populous, it had long had colonies of Greeks and Jews; commerce and emigration were encouraged by the safety of the great Roman road which ran through the cities just named.
The Destination of the Epistle
The ambiguity of the words "Galatia" and "Galatians" makes it difficult to determine the destination of the epistle and the time of its writing. The matter is surprisingly complicated. An attempt may, however, be made here to give the more important of the reasons usually adduced for and against two conflicting theories. If the apostle used the term "Galatia" in its more popular sense, he must have intended the epistle for churches in some unnamed cities, perhaps Ancyra, Pessinus, and Tavium; this is the "North Galatian" theory. If, however, he used it in the official sense (i.e., as the designation of the Roman province), he addressed the churches in Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe; this is the "South Galatian" theory.
In favor of the former, it is urged that all the Fathers refer it to the northern cities; but, even so, the existence of churches in them is merely conjectural. J. B. Lightfoot, who supports this theory, writes, "It is strange [that] . . . not a single name of a person or place, scarcely a single incident of any kind connected with the apostle's preaching in Galatia should be preserved in either the history, i.e., Acts, or the Epistle." And yet, the work there must have been of a strikingly successful character. Those who advocate this theory find room for a visit to these cities in Acts 16:6 (where Asia is not the continent now so-called, but Proconsular Asia, a Roman Province west of Galatia), and for a second visit, implied in 4:13, Acts 18:23. But the way from Syrian Antioch through Galatia and Phrygia to Ephesus does not seem to lie through North Galatia, even though the apostle reached his destination, not by Colossae and Laodicea, but by "the upper country," 19:1.
The other theory is also beset with difficulties. It is stated in support of it that Paul, being a Roman citizen, would use the official designation of the countries to which he refers. He does not always do so, however, Pisidia, Phrygia, and Mysia, 14:24; 16:6-8, e.g., are geographical, rather than official, names for these countries. Moreover, Lystra and Derbe are styled by Luke "cities of Lycaonia," 14:6, and Antioch is described as "of Pisidia," 13:14, but they are not called Galatian.
It may be gathered from the epistle itself that the churches addressed were mainly Gentile, though there was a Jewish element among them. According to Acts, the churches at Derbe and the neighboring towns were also mixed-Jew and Gentile. Antioch, 13:14, and Iconium, 14:1, had synagogues, and there is other and non-Biblical testimony to the presence of Jews in South Galatia. On the other hand, there is no trace of any considerable settlement of Jews in North Galatia.
Again, the mention of Barnabas, 2:13, suggests that he was known to the readers of the Epistles; but Barnabas was not with Paul when he is supposed to have visited the northern cities, Acts 16:6; whereas they were fellow travelers when the churches in the southern cities were formed, chapters thirteen and fourteen. Against this, of course, it may be urged that Barnabas is mentioned in much the same way in 1 Corinthians 9:6, though he was not with Paul when the church was founded there.
Other arguments there are, on either side, of greater weight or less, but perhaps what has been written is sufficient for the present purpose. The conclusion cannot be said to be emphatic either way, but the balance overall is favorable to the view that the epistle was addressed to the churches of South Galatia, i.e., those of Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe.
Authenticity of the Epistle
The genuineness of this epistle has seldom been called in question. The elements of personal character reflected in it are in accord with what we know of the apostle from other sources. Here exists the same cogent reasoning, the same warmth of feeling, the same capacity for indignation, and for tenderness, that characterize his other writings, but all heightened and emphasized by the circumstances that called forth the epistle. Here, too, is Paul's theology, his characteristic insistence on the doctrines of grace, of salvation by faith apart from works, while at the same time, his exhortations to good works are as marked as in all his other writings.
Ancient testimony, direct and indirect, is as complete as could be expected, considering how few writings of the subapostolic age remain. Among direct testimonies may be mentioned the list of books accepted by Marcion, the heretic, circa a.d. 140; the epistle was also accepted by his orthodox opponents. It is included in the "Muratorian Fragment" about the end of the second century a.d. The Syrian and Old Latin Versions contain it; these were made probably before the second century closed.
Date of the Epistle
The subject matter of the epistle, the battle between those who contended that the Gentiles must become Jews in order to become Christians, and those who claimed that the Gentiles could become Christians directly, itself fixes the period to which the epistle must belong. It could not have been written after a.d. 70, when Jerusalem fell and the Jewish religion lost its national status, nor could it have been written before the preaching of the gospel to the Gentiles had become fairly general, say about a.d. 48-49, cp. Acts 13:46. These obvious considerations bring the epistle well within the period of the apostle's active labors (see the section on "Authenticity" above) but the difficulties that beset the attempt to fix a date for it during that period are very perplexing. For instance, if he wrote after the Council at Jerusalem, Acts 15, why does he not refer to its decrees, which indeed he himself delivered to the churches over an area including the Galatian cities, Acts 16:1-6, no matter whether the "Northern" or "Southern" theory is accepted? This consideration points to a date preceding the Council and would make the epistle the earliest of all Paul's writings.
On the other hand, if Paul had already written the epistle, which contains such words as these, "I Paul say unto you, that, if ye receive circumcision, Christ will profit you nothing" (5:2) how could he himself thereafter have circumcised Timothy, as it is recorded in Acts 16:3 that he did? But this consideration would make the epistle later than the Second Missionary Journey and seems quite inconsistent with the former.
Again, the epistle could hardly have been written later than Paul's imprisonment at Caesarea, a.d. 57-59, see Acts 23:33, for internal evidence suggests that it belongs not to the period of Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, but to that of Corinthians and Romans.
The words "the first time" (r.v. marg., "the former time"), 4:13, seem to indicate that the apostle had visited the Galatian...
