A Blue-Collar Bible Scholar’s Dive into Galatians (Part 1)

Back in the mid-90s, when I was a graduate student at Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia, I had the extreme good fortune of being able to take numerous classes from Gordon Fee. For me, he was the most influential and impactful professor I have ever had. So much so, that I dedicated my Blue-Collar Bible Scholar’s Reader’s Guide to the New Testament to him. In the course Biblical Theology that he and Bruce Waltke co-taught, I remember him saying that if he could choose only two of Paul’s letters, he would pick Galatians and Philemon. Although Romans perhaps is Paul’s “magnum opus,” Galatians crystallizes the essence of what the Gospel is and how it is to be worked out in the world. Philemon, then, gives a direct, to-the-point application of what the Gospel looks like in the real world—it is the Gospel in action in the real world.

For that reason, being that I have been suffering from a bit of “writer’s block” on my blog for the past month or so, I’ve decided to do a short series on Galatians. Much, if not most, of what I will be writing about Galatians can be found in my BCBS Reader’s Guide to the New Testament, and I encourage anyone to check it out—who knows? If you’re feeling saucy, you can even buy a copy! At some point soon (hopefully by the fall) there will be an accompanying BCBS NT Reader’s Guide Workbook that you can use for personal study, small Bible Study groups, or (if you’re a teacher) Bible classes. That being said, let’s get into Galatians!

A Little Bit of Historical Background and Debate
There is a very interesting (and somewhat controversial) item regarding when Paul wrote Galatians and to whom he wrote it. This stems from the fact that Paul didn’t address this letter to a specific church…and the fact that within Galatians, Paul gives some rather interesting tidbits of historical information that just beg for scholars to try to piece together.

Some scholars hold to what is known as the Northern Galatia theory.  They argue that Paul wrote Galatians somewhere between AD 54-57 during his third missionary journey. Therefore, the letter is written to churches in the northern region of Galatia that (these scholars speculate) Paul must have visited during his second missionary journey (AD 51-52). They further argue that Paul’s visit to Jerusalem that he mentions in Galatians 2:1-10 must be a reference to the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 (AD 49-50).

The problem with this theory is two-fold. First of all, we simply have no knowledge of Paul establishing any churches in northern Galatia—that simply isn’t mentioned anywhere in Acts or in any of Paul’s letters. Secondly, it is really odd that there would be such a controversy about circumcision in Paul’s churches after the issue had been decided at the Jerusalem Council. Needless to say, I don’t find the Northern Galatia theory to be that convincing.

The more accepted theory regarding the time and audience of Galatians is known (surprise, surprise) as the Southern Galatia theory. This theory argues Paul wrote Galatians shortly after his first missionary journey to the cities of south Galatia (as recorded in Acts 13-14: Antioch Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe), but before the Jerusalem Council (as recorded in Acts 15). That would explain why circumcision was a big issue with Paul’s churches in southern Galatia—the Jerusalem Council had not yet made a formal decision on the issue. This theory also suggests that Paul’s visit to Jerusalem in Galatians 2:1-10 must have been when he helped deliver feminine relief (Acts 11:27-30) around AD 42.

Although I find the Southern Galatia theory more convincing, I make one “tweak” to it. I don’t think it makes sense that Paul’s visit to Jerusalem in 2:1-10 is a reference to his famine relief visit in Acts 11:27-30. Paul had not yet gone on his first missionary journey, and thus had not yet established primarily Gentile churches. Therefore, the issue of, “Should Gentile believers get circumcised?” would not have come up yet in AD 42.

For that reason, I find it makes more sense that Paul’s visit to Jerusalem with Barnabas in 2:1-10 happened after their first missionary journey, but before they went back to Antioch. If I could put it this way, much to their surprise, Paul and Barnabas had just not only witnessed the majority of their fellow Jews reject their Gospel about Jesus Christ, but they witnessed the Holy Spirit being poured out on Gentiles who had turned to Christ. On top of that, throughout their journey, they encountered hostile opposition from most of the Jews in the province, especially when they reached out to Gentiles, brought many of them to faith in Christ, and told the Gentile believers they didn’t have to get circumcised and become Jews.

Simply put, it was during that first missionary trip in AD 49-50 in the southern province of Galatia that the issue of circumcision became the major controversy in the early decades of the Church. In any case, Paul and Barnabas established those largely Gentile churches in southern Galatia, but they probably wanted to swing by Jerusalem on their way back to Antioch so they could privately meet with James, Peter, and John, tell them what they had just done, and see if they approved, which they did. That, I submit, is exactly what Paul conveys in Galatians 2:1-10.

I think this makes sense for two reasons. First, as Galatians 2:1 clearly says, this private meeting happened 14 years after Paul’s initial meeting with the apostles shortly after his conversion, which would have been around AD 36. There is no way that a famine relief visit in AD 42 would be considered 14 years later. Second, this also helps us make sense of Peter’s actions in Antioch (2:11-14) after the private meeting. Since Paul’s meeting with them was private, the Church as a whole had not yet taken an “official stance” on the issue of whether or not Gentile believers should be circumcised. It was that dust-up between Paul and Peter in Antioch, as well as the fact that some Jews had gone to Paul’s churches in Galatia and had started pressuring Gentile believers to get circumcised, that precipitated the calling of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. This conflict is what is mentioned in Acts 15:1-2.

Put all that together, when it comes to Galatians, this is what we get: it was written after Paul’s first missionary journey (AD 48-49), at some point before the Jerusalem Council (AD 49-50). If we were to place Galatians within the historical timeline of Acts, it would be written between the events of Acts 14 and Acts 15.

The Big Things to Know in Galatians
Reading Paul’s letters can get a little confusing at times. For that matter, reading almost anything in the entire Bible can get confusing at times! For that reason, when it comes to Galatians, I think there are three “big things” to keep an eye out for, for they really are the main issues in Galatians.

First of all, for Paul, the heart and soul of the Gospel boils down to this: faith and the work of the Spirit producing righteousness.

Secondly, Paul is insistent that Torah observance is worthless when it comes to righteousness. Paul is quite clear that submitting to the outward signs of the Torah—things like circumcision—accomplishes nothing. Therefore, insisting on Torah observance is antithetical to the Gospel.

Finally, a big part of Paul’s teaching is that ultimately there are two kinds of existence—there are only two ways to live one’s life. If you live by the rules of this present age, you are going to be living according to the flesh. And that means you will be enslaved to your passions and will produce divisiveness wherever you go. By contrast, if you live out the Spirit-empowered life of the Age to Come while still here in this present age, you are going to be living according to the Spirit. And that means you will be living, along with other believers, as God’s children and producing healing and reconciliation.

Galatians really is one of my favorite letters of Paul. Not only did it help me understand how the Evangelicalism in which I grew up tended to have its own kind of “Evangelical Torah observance” that was ultimately worthless and that ended up created a lot of hurt and division (just look at the state of Evangelicals vs. Exvangelicals in our modern “culture wars”), but it also challenged me (and continues to challenge me) to focus on what true righteousness looks like. I grew up in an Assemblies of God church, where being “Spirit-filled” was always emphasized, but it seemed to always be understood in certain “showy” actions, to be quite frank—like speaking in tongues, etc. But in Galatians, the true evidences of “living in the Spirit” are things much more basic and challenging in everyday life—things that sound nice but really can be a bitch to live out if you insist on continuing to live according to the flesh. The reason should be obvious: you can’t get the fruit of the Spirit by engaging in the works of the flesh.

In any case, I hope you will enjoy my little dive into Galatians over the next week or so. Come back and we’ll get into Galatians 1-2 next time.