Of the introductory issues normally considered by scholars when New Testament writings are investigated, the authorship of the Letter to the Galatians received the least attention. Two scholars doubted the authenticity of the letter. Building on work previously published in 1967–1968, Frank McGuire
11 F.R. McGuire, “Galatians as a Reply to Acts”, Journal of Higher Criticism 10:1 (2003), pp. 1–22.
(again) proposed in 2003 that the letter was not written by Paul. McGuire based this on the dependence of Galatians 2 on Acts 15 and indications that 2 Corinthians and Galatians were not written by the same person. In an earlier article, McGuire
22 F. McGuire, “The Posthumous Clash between Peter and Paul”, Journal of Higher Criticism 9:2 (2002), pp. 161–174.
(2002) argued that Peter and Paul never met, and that the quarrel narrated in Galatians 2:11–21 was invented by a forerunner of Marcion in order to re-enact the events narrated in Acts 15:30–35. Robert M. Price
33 R.M. Price, The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul (Salt Lake City UT: Signature Books, 2012), pp. 411–436.
(2012) follows W.C. van Manen and takes Marcion as the author of the letter, arguing that the many contradictions and anachronisms in the letter indicate that various redactors are responsible for the current letter. Günther Schwab
44 G. Schwab, Echtheitskritische Untersuchungen zu den vier kleineren Paulusbriefen: Band I, Halbband A: Der Philemonbrief: Beobachtungen zur Sprache des Philipper- und des Galaterbriefs (Echtheitskritische Untersuchungen zu den Paulusbriefen T.1, Norderstedt: Books on Demand, 2011).
(2011) investigates the authenticity of the minor letters of Paul (Philemon, Philippians, Galatians and 1 Thessalonians), primarily from a philological perspective. Although Schwab is aware that it is difficult to offer irrefutable proof that they were not written by Paul, various arguments are forwarded to show that one should rather view them as pseudepigraphical.Five other studies need to be mentioned: J.C. O’Neill
55 J.C. O’Neill, “‘For this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia’ (Galatians 4.25)”, in: S. Moyise (ed.), The Old Testament in the New Testament: Essays in Honour of J.L. North (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 189, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), pp. 210–219. See also earlier: J.C. O’Neill, The Recovery of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (London: SPCK, 1972), pp. 62–64.
(2000) divides 4:21–5:1 into four “oracles”, claiming that they do not show any signs of having been written by Paul. O’Neill believes that they were of Essene origin and were added to the letter at a later stage. William O. Walker Jr. published two studies on 2:7b–8. In one study
66 W.O. Walker Jr., “Galatians 2:8 and the Question of Paul’s Apostleship”, Journal of Biblical Literature 123:2 (2004), pp. 323–327.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3267948
(2004), Walker draws attention to the fact that v. 8 only mentions Peter’s apostleship, and not Paul’s. This may be explained in two ways: sloppiness on Paul’s side, or that this verse deliberately refrains from calling Paul an apostle. According to Walker, this suggests that v. 8 does not stem from Paul. In the other contribution
77 W.O. Walker Jr., “Galatians 2:7b–8 as a Non-Pauline Interpolation”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 65:4 (2003), pp. 568–587.
(2003), Walker argues that the peculiarities in 2:7b–8 are best explained if one accepts that this part of the letter is a non-Pauline interpolation. Thomas Witulski
88 T. Witulski, “Einheitlichkeit versus Relecture: Gal 3,6–14 als Testfall”, Liber Annuus 64:1 (2014), pp. 337–390.
https://doi.org/10.1484/J.LA.5.105501
(2014) discusses 3:6–14 as an example proving the relecture of an originally shorter letter of Paul by an editor. According to Witulski, certain parts of vv. 8, 11–12 and 14 were added by an editor in an attempt to shape the contents of this pericope to fit the broader theological perspective of the apostle. The contribution by Harold W. Hoehner
99 H.W. Hoehner, “Did Paul Write Galatians?”, in: S.-W. Son (ed.), History and Exegesis: New Testament Essays in Honor of Dr. E. Earle Ellis for His 80th Birthday (New York: T & T Clark, 2006), pp. 150–169.
(2006) is of a slightly different nature. Hoehner accepts Pauline authorship but points out that arguments normally used by scholars who try to demonstrate the authenticity of disputed Pauline letters, may also be used to shed doubt on the authenticity of Galatians. Two authors made a contribution from the perspective of statistical analysis: In three studies, published from 2002 to 2004, George K. Barr
1010 Consisting of two articles and a book: G.K. Barr, “The Impact of Scalometry on New Testament Letters”, The Expository Times 114:1 (2002), pp. 3–9,
https://doi.org/10.1177/001452460211400102
, G.K. Barr, “Interpolations, Pseudographs, and the New Testament Epistles”,
makes use of scalometry, an approach focusing on the measurement of issues of scale in the Pauline letters, to challenge the widely-held assumption of the pseudonymity of some of Paul’s letters, as well as the issue of the authorship of Hebrews and 1 and 2 Peter. For the study of Galatians, the contrast that Barr finds in Paul’s letters between opening sections with comparatively longer sections and later sections with shorter sentences is relevant. In the case of Galatians, Barr demarcates the first part as 1:1–5:15. Jacques Savoy
11
17:4 (2002), pp. 439–455, Literary and Linguistic Computing , and G.K. Barr, Scalometry and the Pauline Epistles (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 261, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2004).
https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/17.4.439
(2019) uses two authorship attribution methods (the Burrows’ Delta approach and Labbé’s intertextual approach) to consider the issue of the authorship of the Pauline letters. Based on these approaches, Savoy classifies the Pauline letters into four clusters, with Galatians falling in the group of letters that were certainly written by the same author (Romans, Galatians and 1 & 2 Corinthians.)
2. Occasion
All the issues typically investigated when the occasion of the letter is considered, received attention during the period under review, although not to the same extent.
2.1 Methodological issues
As John M.G. Barclay
1211 J. Savoy, “Authorship of Pauline Epistles Revisited”, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 70:10 (2019), pp. 1089‑1097.
https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24176
pointed out in 1987, the only way in which one can gain a picture of Paul’s opponents in the letter is by a “mirror-reading” of the letter. During the period considered in this study, several scholars drew attention to the methodological underpinnings of such an approach.Moisés Silva
1312 J.M.G. Barclay, “Mirror-Reading a Polemical Letter: Galatians as Test Case”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 31 (1987), p. 73.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X8701003105
(2001) agrees with Barclay that one cannot interpret Galatians without mirror-reading. For Silva, the issue is not whether we should do it, but rather how we should do it. Silva is of the opinion that a reconstruction arising out of the text and explicit statements in the text is more persuasive than one depending on inferences. D.A. Carson
1413 M. Silva, Interpreting Galatians: Explorations in Exegetical Method (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2001 [1996], 2nd edition), pp. 104–108.
(2014) uses the expressions “the ones from James” and “the ones of the circumcision” in 2:11–14 as a test case for illustrating the difficulty involved in the mirror-reading of the letter. Carson considers various interpretations of the two expressions, pointing out that one cannot avoid mirror-reading, and that the best options are usually those based on the greatest number of texts and choices fitting such texts as closely as possible. Justin K. Harding
1514 D.A. Carson, “Mirror-Reading with Paul and against Paul: Galatians 2:11–14 as a Test Case”, in: M.S. Harmon and J.E. Smith (eds.), Studies in the Pauline Epistles: Essays in Honor of Douglas J. Moo (Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan, 2014), pp. 99–112.
(2014) illustrates the methodological problems caused by the mirror-reading of the letter by specifically investigating whether Paul’s opponents questioned his credentials. Harding thinks that Paul was not defending himself or his gospel in the letter. He was merely developing a self-contrast with the opponents. Yon-Gyong Kwon
1615 J.K. Hardin, “Galatians 1–2 without a Mirror: Reflections on Paul’s Conflict with the Agitators”, Tyndale Bulletin 65:2 (2014), pp. 275–303.
(2015) also discusses the problems posed by mirror-reading, in particular that it is impossible to avoid the subjectivity that is part and parcel of this approach. Kwon especially draws attention to and evaluates Barclay’s mirror-reading of the letter, which is widely acknowledged as very successful.
2.2 North Galatian and South Galatian hypotheses
This discussion continued unabated, with no possibility of consensus being reached:Cilliers Breytenbach continued voicing support for the South Galatian hypothesis, a view originally expressed in 1996
1716 Y.-G. Kwon, “Reconsidering Mirror-Reading and Galatians”, 신약연구 14:2 (2015), pp. 244–270.
and based on inscriptions and sources related to the provinces of Cyprus and Galatia. In a study published in 2014,
1817 C. Breytenbach, Paulus und Barnabas in der Provinz Galatien: Studien zu Apostelgeschichte 13f., 16,6, 18,23 und den Adressaten des Galaterbriefes (Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 38, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 1996).
Breytenbach offers epigraphic evidence of the ways in which Paul’s name occurred in the first four centuries, pointing out that his name was used with the highest frequency in the regions in the province of Galatia and in the Phrygian-Galatian borderland where he founded congregations. Furthermore, in a study published in 2017 and based on numerous funerary inscriptions from Lycaonia, Breytenbach and Christiane Zimmermann
1918 C. Breytenbach, “What Happened to the Galatian Christians? Paul’s Legacy in Southern Galatia”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 19 (2014), pp. 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2S.1
offer a detailed survey of the expansion of Christianity in these parts, from Paul’s time until the time of Amphilochius of Iconium (fourth century CE). The study by Mark Wilson
2019 C. Breytenbach and C. Zimmermann, Early Christianity in Lycaonia and Adjacent Areas: From Paul to Amphilochius of Iconium (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 101/Early Christianity in Asia Minor 2, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017).
(2018) also draws attention to inscriptions recently discovered, indicating that Pamphylia formed part of Galatia during Paul’s journeys. Accordingly, Wilson disagrees with Clare Rothschild (see below) that the South Galatian hypothesis cannot be accepted anymore.Several other scholars have published studies expressing their support for the South Galatian hypothesis: Paul Barnett
2120 M. Wilson, “The Denouement of Claudian Pamphylia-Lycia and its Implications for the Audience of Galatians”, Novum Testamentum 60:4 (2018), pp. 337–360.
https://doi.org/10.1163/15685365-12341610
(2000) is of the opinion that Paul addressed the letter to the Pisidians and Lycaonians in the southern parts of the province of Galatia and that he wrote the letter soon after his missionary tour to Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe. Accordingly, Galatians is Paul’s earliest letter and the oldest writing in the New Testament. Thomas Witulski
2221 P. Barnett, “Galatians and Earliest Christianity”, The Reformed Theological Review 59:3 (2000), pp. 112–129.
(2000) supports the South Galatian hypothesis and also argues that Galatians actually consists of two independent letters (which have been passed down to us as 4:8–20 and the rest of the letter respectively). Both of them were sent by Paul to Christians in the southern parts of the province of Galatia. Witulski believes that these two letters were found at a later stage in the archives of these congregations by a post-Pauline editor who combined them into one letter. Dieter Sänger published two studies expressing support for the South Galatian hypothesis: in the first one (2010),
2322 T. Witulski, Die Adressaten des Galaterbriefes: Untersuchungen zur Gemeinde von Antiochia ad Pisidiam (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 193, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000).
Sänger offers a detailed overview of all the arguments that are used for deciding on the locale of the recipients and the dating of the letter, and opts for the South Galatian hypothesis. In the other one (2009),
2423 D. Sänger, “Die Adresse des Galaterbriefs: Neue (?) Überlegungen zu einem alten Problem”, in: M. Bachmann and B. Kollmann (eds.),
Sänger also supports the South Galatian hypothesis and works out the implications of such a choice for the issue of a possible development in Paul’s thought, in particular with regard to Paul’s views on justification. Sänger is of the opinion that the crisis in Galatia served as a catalyst in this regard, but that the basic coordinates about this theme were already in place at the time that Paul founded the congregations in Galatia. Jim Reiher
25
Schreibens (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 106, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2010), pp. 1–56. Umstrittener Galaterbrief: Studien zur Situierung und Theologie des Paulus-
(2015) approaches the matter from the angle of the strained relationship between Paul and James (as reflected in Galatians) and suggests that this situation fits the South Galatian hypothesis best. (For another scholar who supports the South Galatian hypothesis, see the study of Felix John, which is discussed in the next section.)On the other hand, support for the North-Galatian hypothesis continued: Clare K. Rothschild
2624 D. Sänger, “Die Adressaten des Galaterbriefs und das Problem einer Entwicklung in Paulus’ theologischem Denken”, in: W. Kraus (ed.), Beiträge zur urchristlichen Theologiegeschichte (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 163, Berlin/New York NY: De Gruyter, 2009), pp. 247–275.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110215663.3.247
(2012) uses the incident in Pisidian Antioch narrated in Acts 13 to argue against the South Galatian hypothesis. According to Rothschild, the author of Luke-Acts was aware of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians and the incident in Antioch was an attempt on his part to place Paul in South Galatia. Dietrich-Alex Koch
2725 J. Reiher, “Paul’s Strained Relationship with the Apostle James at the Time of Writing Galatians (and How it Contributes to the Debate on the Destination of the Letter)”, The Evangelical Quarterly 87:1 (2015), pp. 18‑35.
(2012) disagrees with James M. Scott
2826 C.K. Rothschild, “Pisidian Antioch in Acts 13: The Denouement of the South Galatian Hypothesis”, Novum Testamentum 54:4 (2012), pp. 334‑353.
https://doi.org/10.1163/15685365-12341401
(1995), who is in favour of the South Galatian hypothesis. Koch rejects Scott’s claim that in Antiquitates Iudaicae I 126, Josephus only has the southern parts of Galatia in mind when he refers to “Galatia”. Koch argues that Josephus is actually referring to the Roman province as a whole.Finally, the study by Michael Winger
2927 D.-A. Koch, “Die Völkertafel von Josephus, Antiquitates Iudaicae I und das ‘Galatien’ des Paulus”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 103:1 (2012), pp. 136–141.
https://doi.org/10.1515/znw-2012-0007
(2002) may also be mentioned here: Winger tries to reconstruct Paul’s preaching during “Act One”, namely during his ministry in Galatia when the congregations were formed. Winger also indicates what Paul probably did not preach about, namely the law, the flesh and orderly conduct – which left a gap which the “Teachers” (Jewish Christian missionaries) tried to fill during “Act Two”.
2.3 Recipients: Identity
Scholars do not agree on the cultural home of the Galatian congregations: According to John G. Gager
3028 J.M. Scott, Paul and the Nations: The Old Testament and Jewish Background of Paul’s Mission to the Nations with Special Reference to the Destination of Galatians (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament
(2000), these congregations consisted entirely of Gentiles who had prior connections to synagogues. Bas van Os
31
(2008) believes that a close reading of the letter shows that it was addressed to a mixed audience of Jews and Gentiles, rather than only to Gentiles – as is generally accepted by scholars. Seung-Moon Lee
3229 M. Winger, “Act One: Paul Arrives in Galatia”, New Testament Studies 48:4 (2002), pp. 548–567.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688502000334
(2008) maintains that the Galatian congregations included both God-fearers and Gentiles who had not known God before becoming believers. The God-fearers had a positive view of Jewish customs and were thus easily persuaded to adopt the new gospel. Jun-Hong Min
3330 J.G. Gager, Reinventing Paul (Oxford/New York NY: Oxford Univ Press, 2000), pp. 77–78.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195150858. 001.0001
(2011) is of a more or less similar view: the congregations in Galatia consisted of God-fearers and Gentiles, and the conflict between the two groups was caused by the insistence of Jewish Christians that the Gentiles had to keep the law, especially in regard to circumcision.Other issues also received attention: Clinton E. Arnold
3431 B. van Os, “The Jewish Recipients of Galatians”, in: S.E. Porter (ed.), Paul: Jew, Greek, and Roman (Pauline Studies 5, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2008), pp. 51–64.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004171596.i-370.32
(2005) links the willingness of the Galatians to receive the gospel of Paul’s opponents to the Galatians’ pre-Christian religious experiences – in particular to the fact that they were accustomed to fulfilling cultic requirements and performing good works to maintain a positive standing with deities. Felix John
3532 S.-M. Lee, “Were the Gentile Christians in the Galatian Community from the God-Fearers?”, 한국신약학회 15:3 (2008), pp. 743–767.
(2016), who opts for the South Galatian hypothesis, offers a detailed investigation of the historical context of the recipients of Galatians. John discusses issues such as climate, landscape, the history of the region, religious background, Roman colonisation and urbanisation, road infrastructure and participation in the imperial cult. John rejects several theories on the cause of the Galatian crisis (a renewed interest in ritual purity amongst Gentiles, self-castration of the galli, emperor worship) and rather opts for Jewish-Christian influence from Palestine.Finally, although perhaps not directly relevant for this section, the study by David Smith (2020) should be noted. Smith
3633 J.-H. Min, “Understanding the Constituent Groups of the Galatian Community and the Law”, 한국신약학회 18:3 (2011), pp. 819–851.
believes that epistolary literature may serve as evidence to support Richard Bauckham’s
3734 C.E. Arnold, “‘I Am Astonished That You Are So Quickly Turning Away!’ (Gal 1.6): Paul and Anatolian Folk Belief”, New Testament Studies 51:3
claim in The Gospel for All Christians that the Gospels were written for a wider audience. Smith uses Galatians as one of the examples to show that even in cases where Paul’s letters were written to a particular locale, they had more than one address.
2.4 Recipients: Broader background
Much research is being done on the Galatian people outside of our discipline, and although this may perhaps not be directly relevant to the exegesis of the letter, it is important to be aware of the research themes that receive attention. What follows serves as a representative sample of what has been done, but does not constitute an exhaustive overview:Broad overviewsGareth Darbyshire, Stephen Mitchell and Levent Vardar
38
(2005), pp. 429–449.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688505000226
(2000) offer an alternative reconstruction of the process of settlement of the Galatians in Asia Minor. Stephen Mitchell
3935 F. John, Der Galaterbrief im Kontext historischer Lebenswelten im antiken Kleinasien (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 264, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016).
(2005) discusses the difference between the representation of the Galatians in the Hellenistic world and the reality. Karl Strobel
4036 D. Smith, The Epistles for All Christians: Epistolary Literature, Circulation, and the Gospels for All Christians (Biblical Interpretation Series 186, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2020), pp. 41–42.
(2007) explains the difference between the historical identity and ethnic tradition of the Galatians.Specific persons/issues/eventsIn this instance, a wide variety of contributions may be mentioned: Karl Strobel
4137 R. Bauckham (ed.), The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1998).
(2009) traces the process of ethnogenesis and acculturation of the Galatian peoples in Central Anatolia. Strobel explains how the three Galatian groups originated, how the Galatian elite were shaped by an early Hellenization process, and how important the common use of the Celtic language was to them. Altay Coşkun
4238 G. Darbyshire, S. Mitchell and L. Vardar, “The Galatian Settlement in Asia Minor”, Anatolian Studies 50 (2000), pp. 75–97.
(2012) investigates the personal names of the Celtic mercenaries that began to settle in eastern Phrygia from 278 BCE in order to gain more knowledge of their cultural identity. Coşkun has made several other contributions: In a study published in 2013,
4339 S. Mitchell, “The Galatians: Representation and Reality”, in: A. Erskine (ed.), A Companion to the Hellenistic World (Blackwell Companions to
Coşkun outlines the Phrygian and Celtic traditions that may be seen in the naming practices followed by the Galatians. In another study, also published in 2013,
44
the Ancient World, Malden MA/Oxford: Blackwell, 2005), pp. 280–293.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470996584.ch17
Coşkun describes the behaviour of the Galatians in Central Anatolia from the perspective of the notion of belonging and isolation. In a study in 2015,
4540 K. Strobel, “Die Galater und Galatien: Historische Identität und ethnische Tradition im Imperium Romanum”, Klio 89:2 (2007), pp. 356–402.
https://doi.org/10.1524/klio.2007.89.2.356
Coşkun explains how the tetrarchy was used as a Hellenistic-Roman way of ruling (“Herrschaftsinstrument”), and in one published in 2018,
4641 K. Strobel, “The Galatians in the Roman Empire: Historical Tradition and Ethnic Identity in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor”, in: T. Derks and N. Roymans (eds.), Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity: The Role of Power and Tradition (Amsterdam Archaeological Studies 13, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2009), pp. 117–144.
Cicero’s lampoon against Publius Clodius (56 BCE) is investigated in order contribute to the knowledge of the history of the city Pessinus. Fernando López Sánchez
4742 A. Coşkun, “Intercultural Anthroponomy in Hellenistic and Roman Galatia, with Maps Drafted by Michael Grün and April Ross”, Gephyra 9 (2012), pp. 51–68.
(2017) raises the question of whether the presence of Galatians in Macedonia from 280 to 277 BCE was the result of an invasion from their side or of an invitation. Victor Parker
4843 A. Coşkun, “Histoire par les noms in Ancient Galatia”, in: R. Parker (ed.), Personal Names in Ancient Anatolia (Proceedings of the British Academy 191, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 79–106.
https://doi.org/10.5871/bacad/9780197265635.003.0006
(2018) traces the history of Deiotarus, one of the Roman “client kings”, from 63 BCE until his death around 40 BCE. Stephen Mitchell
4944 A. Coşkun, “Belonging and Isolation in Central Anatolia: The Galatians in the Graeco-Roman World”, in: S.L. Ager and R. Faber (eds.), Belonging and Isolation in the Hellenistic World (Toronto/Buffalo NY/London: University of Toronto Press, 2013), pp. 73–95.
(2018) discusses the diet of people living in Asia Minor and how this was influenced by environment, climate, and, most importantly, by the external powers controlling Anatolia. İlknur Gürgen
5045 A. Coşkun, “Die Tetrarchie als hellenistisch-römisches Herrschaftsinstrument: Mit einer Untersuchung der Titulatur der Dynasten von Ituräa”, in: E. Baltrusch and J. Wilker (eds.), Amici – Socii – Clientes? Abhängige Herrschaft im Imperium Romanum (Berlin Studies of the Ancient World 31, Berlin: Edition Topoi, 2015), pp. 161–198.
(2019) discusses the identity of the Galatians, the reasons for their migration into Anatolia and the effects this had on the political structure of Anatolia. Julian Bennett
5146 A. Coşkun, “Brogitaros and the Pessinus-Affair: Some Considerations on the Galatian Background of Cicero’s Lampoon against Clodius in 56 BC (Harusp. Resp. 27–29)”, Gephyra 15 (2018), pp. 119–133.
https://doi.org/10.37095/gephyra.420760
(2019) reconsiders the views scholars have of the annexation and provincialisation of Galatia by focusing on issues specifically related to the Roman military. Maria Domitilla Campanile
5247 F.L. Sánchez, “Galatians in Macedonia (280–277 BC): Invasion or Invitation?”, in: T.Ñ. del Hoyo and F.L. Sánchez (eds.), War, Warlords, and Interstate Relations in the Ancient Mediterranean (Impact of Empire 28, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017), pp. 183–203.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004354050_010
(2020) offers an overview of the life of Chiomara, the wife of Ortiagon, one of the chieftains of the Galatian Tolostobogi.ArchaeologyStephen Mitchell and David French
5348 V. Parker, “Deiotarus: Zur Karriere eines römischen Klientelkönig”, Electrum 25 (2018), pp. 187–208.
https://doi.org/10.4467/20800909EL.18.009.8929
(2012) published 314 Greek and Latin inscriptions from Ankara, from the time of Augustus until the end of the third century CE; 31 of these were published for the first time. Mary M. Voigt
5449 S. Mitchell, “L’alimentation en Asie Mineure à travers les siècles: Esquisse d’une histoire culturelle”, Syria 95 (2018), pp. 111–120.
https://doi.org/10.4000/syria.7254
(2012) offers an overview of the ways in which animal and human sacrifice was used at Galatian Gordion, in particular its ritualistic use within a multi-ethnic society. Based on archaeological findings, Voigt
5550 İ. Gürgen, “Galatlarin Anadolu’ya Geçiş Süreci ve Bithynia Ile Ilişkileri”, CBÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 17:3 (2019), pp. 234–245.
https://doi.org/10.18026/cbayarsos.547458
(2013) also identifies three specific periods in the history of cities in Galatian Gordion that may be linked to political instability. Altay Coşkun
5651 J. Bennett, “The Annexation of Galatia Reviewed”, Adalya 22 (2019), pp. 223–257.
(2014) draws attention to the difficulty of using Latène artefacts to determine the ethnic identity of the Galatian immigrants to Anatolia during the third century BCE. Hacer Kumandaş Yanmaz
5752 M.D. Campanile, “Il Valore di Chiomara: Storia e Racconto nelle Campagne di Manlio Vulsone Contro i Galati”, in: C. Bearzot, F. Landucci and G. Zecchini (eds.), I Celti e il Mediterraneo (Contributi di Storia Antica 18, Milan: Vita & Pensiero, 2020), pp. 197–215.
(2016) shows that coins from the town Pessimus in ancient Galatia reflect the economic, social and religious structures of this town that was well-known for the Cybele cult. Based on an unpublished inscription and a Greek dedication, Stephen Mitchell
5853 S. Mitchell and D. French, The Greek and Latin Inscriptions of Ankara (Ancyra): Vol. I: From Augustus to the End of the Third Century AD (Vestigia 62, München: C.H. Beck, 2012).
(2017) describes two Galatian cults in Dacia, linked to Zeus Erusenos and Zeus Heptakomikos respectively.LanguageThe language spoken by the Galatians was a Celtic language that eventually became extinct. Two studies on this language should be noted: Philip Freeman
5954 M.M. Voigt, “Human and Animal Sacrifice at Galatian Gordion: The Uses of Ritual in a Multiethnic Community”, in: A. Porter and G.M. Schwartz (eds.), Sacred Killing: The Archaeology of Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East (Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns, 2012), pp. 237–290.
https://doi.org/10.5325/j.ctv1bxgxm5.14
(2001) collected all the words of Galatian that are known to modern scholarship – about 120 words of what was still a living language in Paul’s time. Joseph F. Eska
6055 M.M. Voigt, “The Violent Ways of Galatian Gordion”, in: S. Ralph (ed.), The Archaeology of Violence: Interdisciplinary Approaches (IEMA Proceedings 2, Albany NY: State University of New York Press, 2013), pp. 203–231.
(2013) compiled a “salvage grammar” of the language and noted that Galatian did not differ much from Transalpine Celtic.
2.5 Opponents: Identity
Most of the scholars who published on this issue identify the opponents as either Jewish Christians or Jews opposing Paul:According to John G. Gager (2000),
6156 A. Coşkun, “Latène-Artefakte im hellenistischen Kleinasien: Ein problematisches Kriterium für die Bestimmung der ethnischen Identität(en) der Galater”, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 64 (2014), pp. 129‑162.
“anti-Pauline apostles within the Jesus-movement” (Gager’s emphasis) whom Paul apparently connected to the “false brethren” and “the ones from James” opposed his law-free gospel in Galatia. Charles H. Talbert
6257 H. Kumandaş Yanmaz, “Galatlar ve Galatia Bölgesi Pessinus Darpli Sikkelerinde Galatlarin Izleri”, Journal of International Social Research 9:44 (2016), pp. 716–737,
https://doi.org/10.17719/jisr.20164420144
, and H. Kumandaş Yanmaz, “Galatia Krallik (Tolistoboglar) Dönemi Pessinus Darpli Sikkeleri”, Sosyal Bilimler Arastirmalari Dergisi 6:15 (2016), pp. 215–235.
(2001) regards Galatians as proof that there were “Christian messianist Jews” who required Gentile Christians to be circumcised and to keep the law in order to be children of Abraham in the full sense of the word. Andreas Lindemann
6358 S. Mitchell, “Two Galatian Cults in Dacia”, Gephyra 14 (2017), pp. 15–21.
https://doi.org/10.37095/gephyra.318446
(2004) reflects critically on Walter Schmithals’s proposal that Paul’s opponents in Galatia are best described as enthusiasts or Gnostics. Lindemann believes that there are clear indications in the letter that they rather encouraged practices that can only be described as “judaistic”. Bern Wander
6459 P. Freeman, The Galatian Language: A Comprehensive Survey of the Language of the Ancient Kelts in Greco-Roman Asia Minor (Ancient Near Eastern Texts and Studies 13, Lewiston NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 2001).
(2007) thinks of the opponents in Galatia as Jewish Christians who were under pressure as a result of the growing radicalism in the Jewish community in the fifties and sixties of the first century CE, which explains their behaviour. Jerry L. Sumney
6560 J.F. Eska, “A Salvage Grammar of Galatian”, Zeitschrift für Celtische Philologie 60 (2013), pp. 51–63.
(2007) prefers to refer to them as “Christ-believing Jews” who opposed Paul’s teaching and not anachronistically as “Jewish Christians”. Furthermore, Sumney thinks that these people differ from the people opposing Paul in Corinth. Martinus C. de Boer
6661 J.G. Gager, Reinventing Paul (Oxford/New York NY: Oxford Univ Press, 2000), p. 79.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195150858.001. 0001
(2008) regards them as Christian Jews who probably had connections to the church in Jerusalem. They tried to persuade the Galatian Christians to practise circumcision and observe the law. They were also quite effective missionaries, since the Galatians were accepting their gospel at the stage when Paul wrote his letter. Adam Gregerman
6762 C.H. Talbert, “Paul, Judaism, and the Revisionists”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 63:1 (2001), pp. 1–22.
(2009) accepts that the opposition in Galatia came from Jewish Christians but challenges the idea that this was due to a zealous counter-mission on their part. These “teachers” (as Gregerman calls them) insisted that membership of a Jewish movement was impossible without circumcision. Ian J. Elmer
6863 A. Lindemann, “Der Galaterbrief als historische Quelle”, in: C. Breytenbach (ed.), Paulus, die Evangelien und das Urchristentum: Beiträge von und zu Walter Schmithals: Zu seinem 80. Geburtstag herausgegeben (Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 54, 2004), pp. 731–736.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047412472_032
(2009) situates the crisis in Galatia within the context of a much broader conflict in Christianity – a conflict that had its earliest origins in the Jesus movement in Jerusalem. Elmer detects echoes of events in the Letters to the Romans, Corinthians and Philippians that are reminiscent of those found in Galatians, implying that the conflict in Galatia was but one chapter in a much larger scenario in which Jerusalem and its leadership constituted the primary source of Paul’s problems. Three other contributions of Elmer should also be mentioned here: In the first one
6964 B. Wander, “Die sogenannten ‘Gegner’ im Galaterbrief”, in: V.A. Lehnert and U. Rüsen-Weinhold (eds.), Logos – Logik – Lyrik: Engagierte exegetische Studien zum biblischen Reden Gottes: Festschrift für Klaus Haacker (Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihre Geschichte 27, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2007), pp. 53–70.
(2011), Elmer argues that Paul was fighting against the same group of opponents on several fronts. Their origins are to be linked to the circumcision party in Jerusalem (around the three pillar apostles) and thus Paul aimed his polemic in the letter against both the pillar apostles and his opponents in Galatia. In the second one
7065 J.L. Sumney, “Paul and Christ-Believing Jews Whom He Opposes”, in: M. Jackson-McCabe (ed.), Jewish Christianity Reconsidered: Rethinking Ancient Groups and Texts (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), pp. 57–80, 311–313. See also: J.L. Sumney, “‘People of God’ in Paul: Reflections in Conversation with Eckhard Schnabel”, Stone-Campbell Journal 11:2 (2008), pp. 235–246.
(2013), Elmer describes the crisis in Galatians as a symptom of “an escalating internecine struggle between two branches of the Christian family”. In the third one
7166 M.C. de Boer, “The New Preachers in Galatia: Their Identity, Message, Aims, and Impact”, in: R. Buitenwerf, H. Hollander and J. Tromp (eds.), Jesus, Paul, and Early Christianity: Studies in Honour of Henk Jan de Jonge (Novum Testamentum Supplements 130, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2008), pp. 39–60.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047443469_004
(2013), Elmer maintains that Paul’s opponents used their own version of his conversion and apostleship against him and that he used 1:13–2:14 as narratio to counter such attempts. Chandra Gunawan
7267 A. Gregerman, “The Lack of Evidence for a Jewish Christian Countermission in Galatia”, Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 4:1 (2009), pp. 1–24.
https://doi.org/10.6017/scjr.v4i1.1513
(2011) situates the crisis reflected in Galatians in terms of tensions in Jewish and Gentile relations in Second Temple Judaism, one aspect of which is that it was regarded as impossible to be part of God’s people without being circumcised. Jun-Hong Min
7368 I.J. Elmer, Paul, Jerusalem and the Judaisers: The Galatian Crisis in Its Broadest Historical Context (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.258, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009), pp. 117–164.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151601-6
(2011) links the conflict reflected in Galatians to the insistence of Jewish Christians that the Galatians should keep the law, in particular circumcision. B.J. Oropeza
7469 I.J. Elmer, “Pillars, Hypocrites and False Brothers: Paul’s Polemic against Jerusalem in Galatians”, in: O. Wischmeyer and L. Scornaienchi
(2012) refers to Paul’s opponents as a “missionary-styled group of Jewish Christ-followers” who were putting pressure on the Galatians to be circumcised and threatening them that they would be excluded from the people of God if they disobeyed. In a study of the way in which Paul acted in conflict situations, Peter von der Osten-Sacken
75
Polemik in der frühchristlichen Literatur: Texte und Kontexte (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 170, Berlin/New York NY: De Gruyter, 2011), pp. 123–153. (eds.),
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110223545.2.123
(2014) describes Paul’s opponents as rivalling missionaries who casted doubt on his authority and forced the Galatians to be circumcised and to keep the Jewish law. According to Simon Butticaz
7670 I.J. Elmer, “Family Feud: Paul’s Response to the Internecine Crisis in Galatia”, in: D.C. Sim and P. Allen (eds.), Ancient Jewish and Christian Texts as Crisis Management Literature: Thematic Studies from the Centre of Early Christian Studies (Library of New Testament Studies 445, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2013), p. 61.
(2015), Paul’s opponents in Galatia were Jewish Christians who emphasised circumcision and the Jewish law, and for whom no contradiction seemed to exist between their Christian confession and adhering to a form of nomism so that they felt that they had to complete Paul’s imperfect missionary work. Samuel Benyamin Hakh
7771 I.J. Elmer, “Setting the Record Straight at Galatia: Paul’s narratio (Gal 1:13–2:14) as Response to the Galatian Conflict”, in: W. Mayer and B. Neil (eds.), Religious Conflict from Early Christianity to the Rise of Islam (Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 121, Berlin: De Gruyter, 2013), pp. 21–38.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110291940.21
(2016) refers to Paul’s opponents as a group of Jewish Christians who had travelled to Galatia in order to convince the Galatians to be circumcised and to keep the law. Richard Fellows
7872 C. Gunawan, “Ketegangan Hubungan Yahudi dan Bukan Yahudi dalam Yudaisme Bait Allah Kedua dan dalam Surat Galatia”, Veritas: Jurnal Teologi dan Pelayanan 12:1 (2011), pp. 83–107.
https://doi.org/10.36421/veritas.v12i1.237
(2018) argues that 5:11 is an indication that Paul circumcised Timothy in Galatia and that his opponents in Galatia used this as an argument to support their views that circumcision was necessary. Paul only rejected circumcision because he was subservient to the church leaders in Judea who had decided that Gentile believers did not have to be circumcised. David Álvarez Cineira
7973 J.-H. Min, “Understanding the Constituent Groups of the Galatian Community and the Law”, 한국신약학회 18:3 (2011), pp. 819–851.
(2019) discusses various options that have been raised by scholars as to the identity of Paul’s opponents and opts for understanding them as Christians of Jewish origin who had come to Galatia to persuade the Galatians to be circumcised and to observe the Jewish calendar in order to escape persecution. Based on an investigation of 5:11 and 6:12–13, Woo-Kyung Lee
8074 B.J. Oropeza, Apostasy in the New Testament Communities: Vol. 2: Jews, Gentiles, and the Opponents of Paul: The Pauline Letters (Eugene OR: Cascade, 2012), p. 33.
(2020) concludes that Paul followed a strict form of Judaism/zealotism before his conversion, and that he was later persecuted by Jewish Christians with similar beliefs. They tried to persuade the Galatians to be circumcised in order to avoid persecution by other Jews. Several scholars prefer to link the problems in Galatia not to fellow-Christians, but rather to Paul’s fellow Jews in Galatia: Mark D. Nanos (2000,
8175 P. von der Osten-Sacken, Der Gott der Hoffnung: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Theologie des Paulus (Studien zu Kirche und Israel: Neue Folge 3, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2014), p. 210.
2002
8276 S. Butticaz, “‘Qui vous a ensorcelés?’ (Ga 3,1): Les adversaires de Paul en Asie Mineure: Lecture en miroir de la Lettre aux Galates”, in: C. Clivaz, S.C. Mimouni and B. Pouderon (eds.), Les Judaïsmes dans tous leurs états aux Ier-IIIe siècles: Les Judéens des synagogues, les chrétiens et les rabbins: Actes du colloque de Lausanne, 12–14 Décembre 2012 (Judaïsme Ancien et Origins du Christianisme, Turnhout: Brepols, 2015), pp. 201–219.
) proposes that, after Paul had left Galatia, the Jews (“influencers” as Nanos prefers to refer to them) reacted to the fact that Gentiles (converted by Paul) claimed to be full members of the communities of the righteous on the basis of faith in Christ without going through the normal process of proselyte conversion. The influencers rejected their claims and instead regarded and treated them as candidates for proselytism to Judaism. Dieter Mitternacht (2002,
8377 S.B. Hakh, “Persoalan Status Sebagai Anak-Anak Abraham dalam Surat Galatia”, Gema Teologika 1:1 (2016), pp. 13–30.
https://doi.org/10.21460/gema.2016.11.209
2003
8478 R. Fellows, “Paul, Timothy, Jerusalem and the Confusion in Galatia”, Biblica 99:4 (2018), pp. 544–566.
https://doi.org/10.2143/bib.99.4.3285663
and 2011
8579 D. Álvarez Cineira, “La Identidad de los Agitadores en la Carta a los Gálatas”, Revista Bíblica 81:1/2 (2019), pp. 9–50.
https://doi.org/10.47182/rb.81.n-201937
) is of the opinion that it was not so much a case of Gentile Christians in Galatia planning to convert to Judaism. Rather, these people were trying to avoid suffering and societal pressure by joining the Jewish community, since they thought that by being circumcised – like Paul and other Jewish Christians – they would be regarded by the civil authorities as members of Judaism and would thus not be excluded from community life. Based on an ethnic-political reading of the crisis in Galatia, R. Barry Matlock
8680 W.-K. Lee, “Paul, His Opponents, and Their Persecutors: A Study Based on Galatians 5:11, 6:12–13”, 신학논단 101 (2020), pp. 209–246.
https://doi.org/10.17301/tf.2020.09.101.209
(2012) describes Paul’s opponents as members of local synagogues who were sent to the Pauline congregations as emissaries in order to bring these Gentiles, who were formerly affiliated to the synagogues, back to the fold. Jeremy W. Barrier
8781 M.D. Nanos, “The Inter- and Intra-Jewish Political Context of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, in: R.A. Horsley (ed.), Paul and Politics: Ekklesia, Israel, Imperium, Interpretation: Essays in Honor of Krister Stendahl (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press, 2000), pp. 146–159.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9781501301988.ch-009
In another important contribution, Nanos draws attention to negative views of Judaism that may often be seen in scholarly research by Christians. See: M.D. Nanos, “How Inter-Christian Approaches to Paul’s Rhetoric Can Perpetuate Negative Valuations of Jewishness – Although Proposing to Avoid That Outcome”, Biblical Interpretation 13:3 (2005), pp. 255–269.
https://doi.org/10.1163/1568515054388155
(2020) believes that the Jews in Galatia regarded circumcision as a talisman protecting them from harm and that they viewed Paul as a witch bringing evil to their community. Paul’s defence was that baptism protected them from the evil eye, not circumcision. Other voices should also be noted: According to Richard B. Cook
8882 M.D. Nanos, The Irony of Galatians: Paul’s Letter in First-Century Context (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2002). For some responses to Nanos’s thesis, see: J.I.H. McDonald, “The Irony of Galatians”, Expository Times 114:5 (2003), pp. 161–163, and M. Bachmann, “Nicht von aussen kommende ‘Gegner’, sondern galatisch-jüdische ‘Beeinflusser’? Zu Mark D. Nanos’ Dissertation und ihrer These vom synagogalen sozialen Kontext des Galaterbriefs”, Biblische Zeitschrift 48:1 (2004), pp. 97–103.
https://doi.org/10.1163/25890468-04801007
(2002), Paul was confronted in Galatia by some of the victims of his earlier persecution, possibly from Jerusalem. They had moved or relocated to Galatia, where they began to denounce him to his converts. Michele Murray
8983 D. Mitternacht, “Foolish Galatians? – A Recipient-Oriented Assessment of Paul’s Letter”, in: M.D. Nanos (ed.), The Galatians Debate: Contemporary Issues in Rhetorical and Historical Interpretation (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2002), pp. 408–433.
(2004) believes that the problems in Galatia were caused neither by Jewish Christians nor by Jews, but rather by Gentile Christians who had been circumcised and were trying to persuade other Gentile Christians to do the same. Lauri Thurén
9084 D. Mitternacht, “Korsfäst med Kristus och Utfryst i Galatien”, Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift 79:1 (2003), pp. 31–41.
(2005) claims that Paul had no opponents – or “antagonists” as Thurén prefers to call them – in Galatia. Thurén concedes that there are references to antagonists in the letter but argues that they are only “textual”; not real people. Some people (or something) in Galatia did in fact trigger the massive theological process reflected in the letter, but they were not “antagonists” in the real sense of the word. Rather, these “antagonists” were created by Paul in order to discuss complex theological matters in a way that would interest his audience. Alexander V. Prokhorov
9185 D. Mitternacht, “Re-Reading the Struggle between Paul and the Galatian Churches”, Theology and Life 34 (2011), pp. 231–251.
(2013) interprets 6:12–17 as an indication that the problems that the Galatians had were not caused by Judaizers but by other Gentiles, since the Galatians stopped participating in Roman imperial rituals when they turned to Christianity. According to Martin Goodman
9286 R.B. Matlock, “‘Jews by Nature’: Paul, Ethnicity, and Galatians”, in: D. Burns and J.W. Rogerson (eds.), Far from Minimal: Celebrating the Work and Influence of Philip R. Davies (The Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 484, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2012), pp. 304–315.
(2018), 6:12 refers specifically to Gentile believers in Galatians who were trying to avoid persecution by other Gentiles who were upset because they had abandoned the religious practices of the Gentile communities. In a contribution published in 2019, Thomas Schirrmacher
9387 J.W. Barrier, Witch Hunt in Galatia: Magic, Medicine, and Ritual and the Occasion of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (Paul in Critical Contexts, Lanham MD/New York NY/London: Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2020).
reminds scholars of Wilhelm Lütgert’s views of Paul’s opponents. In the case of Galatians, Lütgert believed that Paul had to battle on two fronts: against false teachings of both Jewish and Gentile opponents.Some scholars focus on the content of the teachings of Paul’s opponents: Hung-Sik Choi
9488 R.B. Cook, “Paul and the Victims of His Persecution: The Opponents in Galatia”, Biblical Theology Bulletin 32:4 (2002), pp. 182–191.
https://doi.org/10.1177/014610790203200406
(2003) thinks that the reason why Paul’s adversaries tried to persuade his congregations to practise circumcision is that they were convinced of the salvific effect of circumcision. John C. Hurd
9589 M. Murray, Playing a Jewish Game: Gentile Christian Judaizing in the First and Second Centuries CE (Études sur le Christianisme et le Judaïsme 13, Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2004), pp. 29–41.
(2005) is of the opinion that Paul’s opponents in Galatia and those referred to in 2 Corinthians 8 and 9 were the same people, had come from Jerusalem and travelled on behalf of the collection. Todd A. Wilson
9690 L. Thurén, “Paul Had No Antagonists”, in: A. Mustakallio, H. Leppä and H. Räisänen (eds.), Lux humana, lux aeterna: Essays on Biblical and Related Themes in Honour of Lars Aejmelaeus (Publications of the Finish Exegetical Society 89, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005), pp. 268–288.
(2007) thinks that the “agitators” had warned the Galatians that they would be cursed by God if they were not circumcised. In contrast, Paul argued that fulfilment of “the law of Christ” (6:2) was necessary but in the sense of loving one another in the Spirit and bearing the burdens of others. Based on the depiction of Abraham in 3:6–14, Thomas Witulski
9791 A.V. Prokhorov, “Taking the Jews out of the Equation: Galatians 6.12–17 as a Summons to Cease Evading Persecution”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 36:2 (2013), pp. 172–188.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X13507163
(2014) maintains that Paul’s opponents in Galatia believed that sonship of Abraham (in particular the blessing and justification associated with it) was based on the law. In this part of the letter, Paul thus argues against such a “soteriological dysfunctionality” of the law. According to Yon-Gyong Kwon
9892 M. Goodman, “Galatians 6:12 on Circumcision and Persecution”, in: M.L. Satlow (ed.), Strength to Strength: Essays in Honor of Shaye J.D. Cohen (Brown Judaic Studies 363, Providence RI: Brown University, 2018), pp. 275–279.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv9hj775.20
(2017), the crisis in Galatia was not caused by a doctrinal issue, but by religious hypocrisy: zeal for outward indications of identity (such as circumcision) was not accompanied by a life in the Spirit that was the essence of Christian life (according to Paul). Karl Olav Sandnes
9993 T. Schirrmacher, “Wilhelm Lütgert and His Studies of the Apostles’ Opponents: Aspiring to a Better Understanding of the New Testament Letters”, Evangelical Review of Theology 43:1 (2019), pp. 40–52.
(2018) uses mirror-reading to determine what Paul’s opponents objected to with regard to his view of the law and why they did so. Sandnes identifies three embedded dictas in Galatians, reflecting the views of the opponents: 2:17 (Paul’s teaching about the law and sin was absurd); 3:21 (Paul believed that the law was opposed to the promises of God) and 5:11 (Paul would eventually realise that the Abraham story that he based his views on included circumcision).
2.6 Dating of the letter
The dating of the letter is usually connected to one’s choice for either the North or South Galatian hypothesis (discussed earlier in this chapter). During the period under review a variety of viewpoints were aired on this matter:Some authors focus on the dating of the letter relative to Paul’s other letters: Martin Meiser
10094 H.-S. Choi, “The Salvation Effect of Circumcision: Theological Basis for the Circumcision Demands of the Galatian Adversaries”, 신약논단 10:1 (2003), pp. 139–158. See also: H.-S. Choi, “Early Christianity and Circumcision: Why Did Paul Oppose the Circumcision of the Gentile Christians?”, 한국기독교신학논총 67 (2010), pp. 75–97.
(2017) maintains that one should distinguish between levels of probability when suggesting possible scenarios for the dating of the letter. Meiser proposes the following (in descending order of probability): 1. Galatians was written before Romans; 2. Galatians was written after 1 Corinthians; 3. Galatians was written before 2 Corinthians; 4. Galatians was written at about the same time as Philippians (from Ephesus), but it cannot be determined which of the two was written first. Eduardo de la Serna
10195 J.C. Hurd, “Reflections Concerning Paul’s ‘Opponents’ in Galatia”, in: S.E. Porter (ed.), Paul and His Opponents (Pauline Studies 2, Atlanta GA: SBL, 2005), pp. 125–148.
(2020) specifically focuses on the relationship between Galatians and 1 Corinthians. De la Serna compares Galatians 3:28 and 1 Corinthians 12:13 and raises the question: “Does Paul add the male-female pair in Galatians, or does he omit it in 1 Corinthians?”. De la Serna chooses the first possibility, which implies that Galatians was written after 1 Corinthians.On the phase in Paul’s ministry that the letter should be placed, no consensus has been reached:Niels Hyldahl
10296 T.A. Wilson, The Curse of the Law and the Crisis in Galatia: Reassessing the Purpose of Galatians (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.225, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), pp. 47–94.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157075-9
(2000) reconstructs the events pertaining to Galatians as follows: formation of the congregations in Galatia – appearance of the opponents (“Eindringlinge”) – Jerusalem conference – Antioch episode – Letter to the Galatians – decision of Christians in Galatia to take Paul’s side. Hyldahl also believes that Paul only learned of the problems in Galatia during his second visit to Jerusalem and that these problems were caused by the “false brethren” (2:4) who had the support of the “pillars” in Jerusalem (2:6, 9). However, during his visit to Jerusalem Paul succeeded in persuading the “pillars” to discontinue their support. Moisés Silva
10397 T. Witulski, “Die Gestalt des Abraham als Beleg für die soteriologische Dysfunktionalität des νόμος: Erwägungen zu Struktur und Argumentation von Gal 3,6–14”, Studien zum Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt 39 (2014), pp. 159–205.
(2001) accepts the South Galatian hypothesis and thus believes that the letter was written to congregations in this part of Galatia. However, Silva also suggests that this happened at a later date than is normally assumed. Alexander J.M. Wedderburn
10498 Y.-G. Kwon, “Religious Hypocrisy in Galatia”, 신약연구 16:1 (2017), pp. 113–147.
https://doi.org/10.24229/kents.2017.16.1.004
(2002) uses the absence or presence of references to Paul’s collection as an aid to place Paul’s letters chronologically. In the case of Galatians, Wedderburn believes that 2:10 does not refer to the collection that Paul (later) organised and that the letter thus lacks any reference to the collection. Accordingly, Wedderburn proposes that the letter was written shortly after the Antioch incident and before Paul had plans to visit Galatia again. Other scholars place the letter quite late: According to Peter Pilhofer
10599 K.O. Sandnes, Paul Perceived: An Interactionist Perspective on Paul and the Law (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.412, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018), pp. 55–91.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-156102-3
(2011), Galatians was the last letter that Paul wrote, and it was probably composed while he was on his way to trial in Rome. Bartosz Adamczewski
106100 M. Meiser, “Der Galaterbrief im Rahmen der Chronologie der Paulusbriefe”, in: M. Labahn (ed.), Spurensuche zur Einleitung in das Neue Testament: Eine Festschrift im Dialog mit Udo Schnelle (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 269, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), pp. 109–124.
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666540691.109
(2011) is of a similar opinion: the letter was written soon after Paul arrived in Rome and before he was imprisoned there.Finally, the contribution by George K. Barr
107101 E. de la Serna, “Un Aporte a la Cronología de las Cartas Paulinas”, Theologica Xaveriana 70 (2020), pp. 1–22.
https://doi.org/10.11144/javeriana.tx70.accp
(2000) should be noted: Barr uses scalometry (an approach focusing on the measurement of issues of scale in the Pauline letters) to show that there is a prime pattern in the 13 Pauline letters. Only some passages in 1 Timothy and Titus do not fit the pattern and thus should be classified as marginal notes from the second century.
2.7 Outcome of the letter
One study focuses specifically on the outcome of the letter: Yun-Lak Chung
108102 N. Hyldahl, “Gerechtigkeit durch Glauben: Historische und theologische Beobachtungen zum Galaterbrief”, New Testament Studies 46:3 (2000), pp. 425–444.
(2013) considers the question of whether the Galatians returned to Paul’s gospel after they received his letter. Chung points out that this is a difficult question to answer but he believes that the possible suspension of the collection in the Galatian congregations and other indications in some of Paul’s later letters suggest that the Christians in Galatia did not return to Paul’s gospel.
3. Historical issues underlying Galatians and/or its relationship to Acts
These issues received considerable attention from scholars. We will first look at studies of a more general nature before attending to the way in which specific events that Paul refers to in Galatians were interpreted.
3.1 General studies
The following three studies focused specifically on Galatians: According to Pavel Rotaru
109103 M. Silva, Interpreting Galatians: Explorations in Exegetical Method (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2001 [1996], 2nd edition), pp. 129–139.
(2011), Galatians is an important and reliable historical document, providing us with first-hand data on Paul as persecutor, his conversion, visit to Arabia and Jerusalem, the pressures on the part of Judaizers, the Jerusalem conference and the Antioch incident. In an article published in 2017, Peter J. Tomson
110104 A.J.M. Wedderburn, “Paul’s Collection: Chronology and History”, New Testament Studies 48:1 (2002), pp. 95–110.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688502000073
discusses Paul’s letters as a reliable source for understanding Pharisaism. One of the passages that Tomson investigates is Galatians 3:16. According to Tomson, the way in which Paul interprets Scripture serves as evidence of a Pharisaic educational system in the first century CE and confirms that there was a continuity between the Pharisaic movement and the rabbis. Christoph W. Stenschke
111105 P. Pilhofer, Neues aus der Welt der frühen Christen (Beiträge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament 195, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2011), pp. 269–297.
(2018) uses Galatians as a source for determining direct and indirect translocal links (“übergemeindliche Verbindungen”) in Early Christianity and indicates the implications of such links for better understanding the situation at that stage. Most of the scholars utilised both Galatians and Acts for interpreting underlying historical issues and did so from a broad variety of perspectives: Moisés Silva
112106 B. Adamczewski, Constructing Relationships, Constructing Faces: Hypertextuality and Ethopoeia in the New Testament Writings (Frankfurt am Main/Berlin/Bern: Peter Lang, 2011), pp. 61–62.
https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-00621-6
(2001) is of the opinion that the two extreme views on the historical reliability of Acts (no problem with the historical reliability of Acts versus easily rejecting its historical reliability) are both wrong. For Silva the best approach is “an intelligent reliance on the authority of Scripture, coupled with sensitivity to its true character and purpose”.
113107 G.K. Barr, “Scalometry and the Dating of the New Testament Epistles”, Irish Biblical Studies 22:2 (2000), pp. 71–90.
Hal E. Taussig
114108 Y.-L. Chung, “After Galatians”, 신약논단 20:4 (2013), pp. 1057–1086.
(2001) proposes an approach for investigating parts in Acts that have parallels in Paul’s letters. This approach includes aspects such as synoptic analysis, ideology criticism, genre criticism, special source criticism and rhetorical criticism. Taussig illustrates this approach by looking at Acts 15 and Galatians 2 and the different views those that were involved in these events had on how Jews and Gentiles should live together. Based on evidence from the Pauline letters and Acts, Eung Chun Park
115109 P. Rotaru, “Tò εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας: Contribuţia Sfântului Apostol Pavel la Dezvoltarea Bisericii Primare, Conform Primelor Două Capitole din Epistola Către Galateni”, Studii Teologice 7:3 (2011), pp. 57‑90.
(2003) argues that there were two gospels in Early Christianity – a gospel of grace and a gospel of circumcision – and that Paul adapted his theology (a theology of grace only) between the writing of Galatians and Philippians to include the gospel of circumcision. Ruth Schäfer
116110 P.J. Tomson, “Les épîtres de Paul: Une source pour le pharisaïsme historique”, Revue des Études Juives 176:1/2 (2017), pp. 1–23.
https://doi.org/10.2143/REJ.176.1.3209395
(2004) offers a detailed reconstruction of the biography of Paul, with the emphasis on the period from the Damascus event until the Jerusalem conference. Two of the many features of this work are the combination of an early date for the founding of the congregations in Galatia with a later date for the writing of the letter and the positive evaluation of the historical value of Acts. Heikki Leppä
117111 C.W. Stenschke, “Übergemeindliche Verbindungen im Urchristentum nach dem Galaterbrief”, HTS Teologiese Studies 74:4 (2018), pp. 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v74i4.4914
(2006) points out that one can read Galatians with and without Acts, and that there are three ways of doing so: 1. Begin with Galatians and use it to evaluate the information from Acts; 2. Trust both as much as one can; 3. Accept Acts and force Galatians into the framework offered by Acts. According to Leppä, the last option is followed by many scholars, although they may not realise it or intend to approach matters in this way. Joon-Ho Lee
118112 M. Silva, Interpreting Galatians: Explorations in Exegetical Method (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2001 [1996], 2nd edition), pp. 113–127.
(2012) examines the continuity between the Historical Jesus, Galatians and Acts 13:23–31. Lee is convinced that Paul knew sayings of and events in the life of Historical Jesus well and that this formed the theological basis of his gospel. Étienne Nodet
119113 Op cit., p. 127.
(2014) disagrees with the view that the meeting in Jerusalem to which Paul refers in 2:1 occurred seventeen years after his conversion, since it gives rise to an awkward chronology. Instead, Nodet contends that Marcion’s text helps us to compile a more realistic chronology. This implies that the meeting in Jerusalem mentioned in Acts occurred before the one mentioned in Galatians. Alain Gignac
120114 H.E. Taussig, “Jerusalem as Occasion for Conversation: The Intersection of Acts 15 and Galatians 2”, Forum 4:1 (2001), pp. 89–104.
(2016) addresses the issue of the pseudepigraphy of the Catholic Letters. Gignac believes that these letters were meant to give voice to the protagonists of the Jerusalem meeting (depicted in Acts 15 and Galatians 2), and in particular to the dialogue depicted there between Paul, James, Peter and John. Peter J. Tomson
121115 E.C. Park, Either Jew or Gentile: Paul’s Unfolding Theology of Inclusivity (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2003).
(2017) disagrees with Martin Goodman’s view that Josephus’s presentation of Judaea in the first half of the century CE is incorrect. One of the arguments that Tomson uses is based upon Romans and Galatians – amongst others the remark in Galatians 6:12 about persecution that Tomson believes indicates increasing pressure on Gentile Christians in Judaea to keep the Jewish law. In 2019, Goodman
122116 R. Schäfer, Paulus bis zum Apostelkonzil: Ein Beitrag zur Einleitung in den Galaterbrief, zur Geschichte der Jesusbewegung und zur Pauluschronologie (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.179, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157163-3
responded. Amongst other things, Goodman contends that Tomson is wrong in arguing that 6:12 refers to Jews from Judaea. Rather, it refers to Gentile Christians in Galatia who tried to avoid persecution from Gentile neighbours. Rainer Riesner
123117 H. Leppä, “Reading Galatians with and without the Book of Acts”, in: T.L. Brodie, D.R. MacDonald and S.E. Porter (eds.), The Intertextuality of the Epistles: Explorations of Theory and Practice (New Testament Monographs 16, Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2006), pp. 255‑263.
(2018) attempts to determine how early the notion of justification by faith can be dated. Riesner thinks that Paul appealed to a common foundation in 2:16a, a conviction that possibly goes back to the early Jerusalem church, the essential elements of which come from the Jesus tradition. Brad McAdon
124118 J.-H. Lee, “Pauline Echoes and Allusions to the Life of the Historical Jesus and His Sayings: Focus on Galatians and on Acts 13:23–31”, 성경과 신학 62 (2012), pp. 213–251.
(2018) discusses two conflicts in Early Christianity and how they were transformed by the rhetorical/compositional practice of mimesis. One of these conflicts is the controversy between Paul and Peter in Galatians 2. According to McAdon, the author of Luke-Acts knew of this and transformed it from an event characterised by controversy and conflict to one characterised by unity. Nathanael Lüke
125119 É. Nodet, “Conversions de Paul: Chronologie”, Revue Biblique 121:4 (2014), pp. 539–573.
(2019) thinks that Acts was composed in the second century CE by somebody who made use of the ten Pauline letters attested by Marcion, his purpose being to provide readers of his time with a reading guide enabling them to interpret the letters in an anti-Marcionite way. Finally, the study by Mario Ferrero
126120 A. Gignac, “Les lettres catholiques comme discours articulés sur les mises en scène de Actes 15 et Galates 2: Hypothèse de travail pour comprendre la pseudépigraphie dans une perspective narratologique et canonique”, Études Théologiques et Religieuses 91:4 (2016), pp. 659–672.
https://doi.org/10.3917/etr.0914.0659
(2014) should be noted. Ferrero views events in religious history towards the end of the first century CE from an economic perspective, in particular from the perspective of a theory of competition between religions. According to Ferrero, the Jews’ decision to halt proselytism during this period was not so much caused by the destruction of the temple in 70 CE, but rather by Paul’s decision that Gentiles did not have to convert to Judaism in order to become Christians (as seen in Galatians).
3.2 Paul’s life in Judaism
Torrey Seland
127121 P.J. Tomson, “Sources on the Politics of Judaea in the 50s CE: A Response to Martin Goodman”, Journal of Jewish Studies 68:2 (2017), pp. 234–259.
https://doi.org/10.18647/3324/JJS-2017
(2002) thinks that Philo’s references to zealotry in Palestine can help one to understand the zeal of a youthful Paul better. From Philo’s observations it is clear that these early zealots did not form a movement/party; they individually resisted what they regarded as gross transgressions of the Jewish law. John Ashton
128122 M. Goodman, “The Politics of Judaea in the 50s CE: The Use of the New Testament”, Journal of Jewish Studies 70:2 (2019), pp. 225–236.
https://doi.org/10.18647/3415/jjs-2019
(2008) investigates several hypotheses that have been advanced to explain why Paul persecuted the church. Ashton believes that although we cannot determine exactly what caused Paul’s behaviour, it must have been something related to what the new movement believed about Jesus that was so offensive to Paul that it inclined him to persecute it. In a study of the concept “zeal” in Romans 10, Galatians 1 and Philippians 3, Dane C. Ortlund
129123 R. Riesner, “Justificação Pela Fé – Qual Cedo? Uma Contribuição Cronológica e Exegética Para o Jubileu da Reforma”, Vox Scripturae 26:1 (2018), pp. 131–162.
https://doi.org/10.25188/FLT-VoxScript(eISSN2447-7443)vXXVI.n1.p131-162.RR
(2012) argues that although Dunn rightly criticises the neglect of the horizontal aspect in the understanding of the concept, Dunn himself neglects the substance of the matter: zeal fundamentally had to do with obedience to God and his law. According to Matthew V. Novenson
130124 B. McAdon, Rhetorical Mimesis and the Mitigation of Early Christian Conflicts: Examining the Influence That Greco-Roman Mimesis May Have in the Composition of Matthew, Luke, and Acts (Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2018).
(2014), one should not read Paul’s statements in 1:13–14 as referring to what we nowadays call “Judaism”. Rather, they refer to “a particular kind of ethnos-bending activity … a traditional political cause … his former occupation in a movement for the defense of Jewish ancestral ways, a sectarian political program”.
131125 N. Lüke, Über die narrative Kohärenz zwischen Apostelgeschichte und Paulusbriefen (Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 62, Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag, 2019). Benjamin J. Lappenga
132126 M. Ferrero, “Competition between Judaism and Christianity: Paul’s Galatians as Entry Deterrence”, Kyklos 67:2 (2014), pp. 204–226.
https://doi.org/10.1111/kykl.12050
(2016) believes that the model that Paul has in mind in 1:14 is Elijah: “[H]is Elijah-like zeal (1 Kgs 19:14–18) has been redirected in light of his calling as an Isaianic servant-like apostle to the Gentiles (Isa 49:1–6).”
133127 T. Seland, “Saul of Tarsus and Early Zealotism: Reading Gal 1,13–14 in Light of Philo’s Writings”, Biblica 83:4 (2002), pp. 449–471.
František Ábel
134128 J. Ashton, “Why Did Paul Persecute the ‘Church of God’?”, Scripture Bulletin 38:2 (2008), pp. 61–68.
(2019) is of the view that Paul uses the term “zealous” in Galatians in the sense that it was used in the Greek milieu, but his idea of what was to be emulated differs from the generally accepted view due to what was revealed to him by God. Dieter Sänger
135129 D.C. Ortlund, Zeal without Knowledge: The Concept of Zeal in Romans 10, Galatians 1, and Philippians 3 (Library of New Testament Studies 472, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2012).
(2017) argues that the term Ἰουδαϊσμός (“Judaism”) and its cognates (used in 1:13ff. and 2:14) should not be understood as only meaning “Judean” (i.e., in an ethnic-regional sense). These words also denote a religious dimension. Daniel Boyarin
136130 M.V. Novenson, “Paul’s Former Occupation in Ioudaismos”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 24–39.
(2019) proposes a modified reading of the term Ἰουδαϊσμός in 1:13–14: Paul uses the expression “traditions of my ancestors” in v. 14 in the same way that it is used in Mark 7. This implies that Paul was specifically referring to his conduct in Judaism as a Pharisee.
3.3 Paul’s conversion/calling
Christos K. Economou
137131 Op. cit., p. 39.
(2002) links Paul’s ecumenical mission to what happened to him at the Damascus event when he realised that Christ was the fulfilment of the Jewish law. This changed him from a persecutor of the church to an apostle to the Gentiles, from Jewish introversion to an ecumenical view. Zeba A. Crook
138132 B.J. Lappenga, Paul’s Language of ζῆλος: Monosemy and the Rhetoric of Identity and Practice (Biblical Interpretation Series 137, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2016).
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004302457
(2004) explains Paul’s experience in terms of the rhetoric of patronage and benefaction: according to Galatians, Paul was called by God as a divine patron-benefactor through Christ (the divine broker) and that gave rise to a change in Paul’s behaviour by which he had wrongly thought he was honouring God. He thus had to understand loyalty to his divine patron in a different way. David C. Sim
139133 Op. cit., p. 146.
(2006) critically discusses Paul’s claim in Galatians that Christ appeared to him and that the revelation that he received was exclusive. Sim points out that accepting Paul’s claim raises grave theological problems. Juan Migual Díaz Rodelas
140134 F. Ábel, “ζῆλος According to Paul: The Concept of ζῆλος in Galatians in the Context of Paul’s Divine Vocation”, in: F. Ábel (ed.), The Message of Paul the Apostle within Second Temple Judaism (Lanham MD: Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2019), pp. 195–220.
(2006) contends that Galatians allows us to accept that Paul visited Jerusalem before the Damascus event and that at first his relationship with the Christians in Jerusalem was normal. It only changed at a later stage. Alexis Bunine
141135 D. Sänger, “Ἰουδαϊσμός – ἰουδαΐζειν – ἰουδαϊκῶς: Sprachliche und semantische Überlegungen im Blick auf Gal 1,13f. und 2,14”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 108:1 (2017), pp. 150–185.
https://doi.org/10.1515/znw-2017-0005
(2006) disagrees with scholars who interpret 1:16 as indicating that Paul began to evangelise Gentiles immediately after his conversion. Bunine believes this only happened on the eve of the Jerusalem conference. This implies that the Jerusalem conference occurred earlier than is normally accepted. Based on a careful study of 1:15–17 and 1 Corinthians 15:8 (in particular, Paul’s language about abortion), Matthew W. Mitchell
142136 D. Boyarin, “Ioudaismos within Paul: A Modified Reading of Galatians 1:13–14”, in: F. Ábel (ed.), The Message of Paul the Apostle within Second Temple Judaism (Lanham MD: Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2019), pp. 167–178.
(2009) argues that the fact that Paul’s claim to be an apostle was rejected, gave rise to his mission to the Gentiles. According to Brian Schmisek
143137 C.K. Economou, “Paul’s Ecumenical Mission”, The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 47:1/4 (2002), pp. 199–213.
(2011), on the basis of 1:16, 1 Corinthians 9:1 and 15:8, one may interpret what happened to Paul at the Damascus event as an interior but a real experience. Johnny Awwad
144138 Z.A. Crook, Reconceptualising Conversion: Patronage, Loyalty and Conversion in the Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 130, Berlin/New York NY: De Gruyter, 2004), pp. 170–179.
(2011) describes Paul’s conversion at the Damascus event as follows: he experienced a Christophany in that Christ revealed himself to him. This became the content of his gospel, and from then onwards he viewed his task as carrying the person of Christ (which dwelled in him) all over the world. Paul Bony
145139 D.C. Sim, “The Appearances of the Risen Christ to Paul: Identifying Their Implications and Complications”, Australian Biblical Review 54 (2006), pp. 1–12.
(2011) suggests that Paul had two conversions: the second one occurred somewhere between the writing of 1 Thessalonians and Romans, since his feelings towards the Jews seem to have changed at that stage. This might have been due to reflection on his side on the mystery of the election of Israel. Douglas A. Campbell
146140 J.M. Díaz Rodelas, “Pablo en Jerusalén: Los Datos de Gálatas”, Estudios Bíblicos 64:3/4 (2006), pp. 485–495.
(2011) interprets 5:11 as an indication that Paul was still committed to circumcision in the first part of his apostolic career and that the transition to a gospel without circumcision only occurred at a later stage. Justin K. Hardin
147141 A. Bunine, “Paul: ‘Apôtre des Gentils’ ou ... ‘des Juifs d’abord, puis des Grecs’?”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 82:1 (2006), pp. 35–68,
https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.82.1.2014920
, See also: A. Bunine, “Où, quand et comment les premiers paiens sont-ils entrés dans l’église? Essai de reconstitution historique”, Bulletin de Littérature Ecclésiastique 108:4 (2007), pp. 455–482.
(2013) and Jan Lambrecht
148142 M.W. Mitchell, Abortion and the Apostolate: A Study in Pauline Conversion, Rhetoric, and Scholarship (Gorgias Biblical Studies 42, Piscataway NJ:
(2017) disagree with Campbell. In another contribution, Campbell
149
(2014) contends that what we have in Paul’s letters, in particular in Galatians, indicates that after the Damascus event, Paul’s ethics were still comprehensively based on the Jewish law. The radical shift to a more flexible attitude only came about in Antioch in Syria, around 36 CE. Based on 1:15–16, Tae Hoon Kim
150143 B. Schmisek, “Paul’s Vision of the Risen Lord”, Biblical Theology Bulletin 41:2 (2011), pp. 76–83.
https://doi.org/
10.1177/0146107911403652
(2013) argues that what happened to Paul at the Damascus event should not merely be called a “conversion”. It was a calling, since Paul offers only one reason why this happened to him, namely for him to become the apostle to the Gentiles. In the light of evidence found in Galatians, 1 Corinthians, Philippians, 1 Timothy and Acts, Giancarlo Pani
151144 J. Awwad, “From Saul to Paul: The Conversion of Paul the Apostle”, Theological Review 32:1 (2011), pp. 3–14.
(2014) proposes that it is best not to refer to what happened to Paul at Damascus as “conversion”. It should rather be called “vocation”, or even “call and vocation”. Thomas E. Phillips
152145 P. Bony, “La conversion, ou les conversions, de saint Paul?”, Bulletin de Littérature Ecclésiastique 112:1 (2011), pp. 85–104.
(2015) is of the opinion that if one only uses Paul’s letters as source, it is clear that he became a Christian before he started to persecute the church. He shared the views of people such as Peter and James at first, and resisted the inclusion of Gentiles into the church, persecuting them in a non-violent way. After his experience of the Christophany he changed his mind and, accordingly, then faced a similar non-violent opposition from leaders such as Peter and James. From the fact that Paul uses Isaiah 49:1–6 in 1:13–16 to describe his conversion, Bart J. Koet
153146 D.A. Campbell, “Galatians 5.11: Evidence of an Early Law-Observant Mission by Paul?”, New Testament Studies 57:3 (2011), pp. 325–347.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S002868851100004X
(2017) deduces that Paul understood himself as following in the footsteps of the Jewish prophets. Furthermore, Luke describes Paul as a Jew loyal to the law, focusing on the Jews, but as then finding his way to the Gentiles on the basis of Isaiah 48:6 – an indication that Luke depicts him in the light of his (i.e., Paul’s) self-understanding. Andrzej Posadzy
154147 J.K. Hardin, “‘If I Still Proclaim Circumcision’ (Galatians 5:11a): Paul, the Law, and Gentile Circumcision”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 3:2 (2013), pp. 145–163.
https://doi.org/10.2307/jstudpaullett.3.2.0145
(2019) is interested in autobiographical elements in Galatians and argues that a careful study of 2:19a within its context shows that it should be taken as an autobiographical note, referring to Paul’s conversion/vocation. Thérèse Andrevon
155148 J. Lambrecht, In Search of Meaning: Collected Notes on the New Testament (2014–2017) (Balti: Scholars’ Press, 2017), pp. 472–476.
(2020) points out that the description of the occurrences at the Damascus event as “conversion” is no longer appropriate. This implies that the Feast of the Conversion of Paul (25 January) should rather be referred to as the Feast of the Vocation/Call of Paul.
3.4 Paul’s visit to Arabia
According to Martin Hengel
156149 D.A. Campbell, “Beyond the Torah at Antioch: The Probable Locus for Paul’s Radical Transition”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 4:2 (2014), pp. 187–214.
(2002), scholars often overlook the importance of Paul’s visit to Arabia (i.e., Nabataea). This visit was longer than scholars usually accept and was characterised by successful missionary accomplishments on Paul’s part. However, he also experienced forceful opposition on the part of synagogues and the government. Carsten Burfeind
157150 T.H. Kim, “Was Paul Converted at Damascus? Focusing on Galatians 1:15–16”, 신약연구 12:1 (2013 ), pp. 30–53.
(2004) highlights another facet of Paul’s argument in 1:17: Paul does not only imply that he was called immediately to be an apostle, but also that he was called immediately to be an apostle to the Gentiles. Chulhong B. Kim
158151 G. Pani, “Paolo Sulla via di Damasco: Conversione o Vocazione?”, La Civiltà Cattolica 3925:1 (2014), pp. 32–46.
(2009) proposes that Paul went to Arabia because he identified with the Servant of the Lord and followed what was written in Isaiah 66:19. Axel Graupner
159152 T.E. Phillips, “When Did Paul Become a Christian? Rereading Paul’s Autobiography in Galatians and Biography in Acts”, in: M. Froelich, M. Kochenash, T.E. Phillips and I. Park (eds.), Christian Origins and the New Testament in the Greco-Roman Context: Essays in Honor of Dennis R. Macdonald (Claremont Studies in New Testament and Christian Origins, Claremont CA: Claremont Press, 2015), pp. 180–201.
(2016) offers four reasons why Paul’s localisation of Sinai in Arabia in 4:25 is correct. Graupner also agrees with Hartmut Gese that Paul (who had visited Arabia) might have known an old Jewish tradition linking Sinai to the city of Egra.
3.5 Paul and Peter
Chul Hae Kim
160153 B.J. Koet, “Paul, a Light for the Gentiles: Paul as Interpreter of Scriptures in Galatians 1:13–16 and in the Acts of the Apostles”, in: F. Wilk and M. Öhler (eds.), Paulinische Schriftrezeption: Grundlagen – Ausprägungen – Wirkungen – Wertungen (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 268, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), pp. 249–274.
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666540608.249
(2007) discusses the relationship between Paul and Peter (the apostles for the Gentiles and the circumcised respectively) as reflected in Galatians 1–2 and 2 Peter 3:15–16. According to Kim, Peter eventually became spiritually mature and recognised that Paul was a fellow-worker of the gospel, thus becoming “a beloved brother” (according to 2 Peter). Rainer Dillmann
161154 A. Posadzy, “‘Ja przez Prawo umarłem dla Prawa’ (Ga 2,19a): Śmierć ‘dla Prawa’ Jako Element Nawrócenia/Powołania Pawła Apostoła”, Colloquia Theologica Ottoniana 1 (2019), pp. 143–163.
https://doi.org/10.18276/cto.2019.1-08
(2008) gives an overview of the tensions between Peter and Paul as reflected in the New Testament. In spite of the tensions, Dillmann believes that the two had a common cause, the proclamation of the gospel, and that the encounters and tensions between them dynamically moved the development of early Christian communities forward. Eduardo de la Serna
162155 T. Andrevon, “Faut-il rebaptiser la fête de la conversion de Paul?”, Études 4267 (2020), pp. 79–90.
https://doi.org/10.3917/etu.4267.0079
(2008) discusses the depiction of Peter in the writings of Paul and shows that they already indicate that Peter’s authority was recognised outside Syro-Palestine. The fact that Peter is not mentioned in the Deutero-Pauline letters is interpreted as an indication that these authors did not find it necessary to resort to the figure of Peter to validate their writings.(Peter is also mentioned in 2:1–10 and 2:11–21. See thus also the discussions of these sections further on in this chapter, as well as in Volume 2.)
3.6 Paul and James
Matti Myllykoski
163156 M. Hengel, “Paul in Arabia”, Bulletin for Biblical Research 12:1 (2002), pp. 47–66.
(2006 and 2007) offers a detailed overview of past and present scholarship on James the Just. In the case of Galatians, Myllykoski discusses research on the depiction of James in 1:18–20, 2:1–10 (the Jerusalem conference) and 2:11–21 (Antioch incident.) (See also the discussion of these sections further on in this chapter, as well as in Volume 2.)
3.7 The Jerusalem conference
Paul’s discussion of the meeting in Jerusalem (2:1–10) received quite a lot of attention. Some of the studies focused on broader issues: Udo Schnelle
164157 C. Burfeind, “Paulus in Arabien”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 95:1–2 (2004), pp. 129–130.
https://doi.org/10.1515/zntw.2004.002
(2000) discusses the Jerusalem conference and the Antioch incident and points out that the question “Should a Gentile become a Jew first in order to become a Christian?” had an immense impact on Early Christianity. The Jerusalem conference offered a solution to this problem, but, in turn, it gave rise to new conflicts, as is clear from the Antioch incident. In Galatians, Paul narrates the Antioch incident from the perspective of the crisis in Galatia, and his view on justification reflected in this letter is thus a new solution to a new challenge. Martino Conti
165158 C.B. Kim, “Why Did Paul Go to Arabia? Paul’s Prophetic Self-Understanding Revealed in Galatians 1:17”, 신약논단 16:1 (2009), pp. 173‑198.
(2002) investigates the Jerusalem conference narrated in Acts 15 in terms of its relationship to Galatians 2:1–10 and concludes that the tensions regarding circumcision and the law were originally separate issues but that they were later integrated by Luke and linked to one event, i.e., the meeting in Jerusalem. Andreas Lindemann
166159 A. Graupner, “Ein Berg in Arabien (Gal 4,25): Sinai – Gottesberg – Horeb”, in: J. Flebbe (ed.), Holy Places in Biblical and Extrabiblical Traditions: Proceedings of the Bonn-Leiden-Oxford Colloquium on Biblical Studies (Bonner Biblische Beiträge 179, Göttingen: V&R Unipress/Bonn University Press, 2016), pp. 13–22.
https://doi.org/10.14220/9783737005913.13
(2004) offers an overview of Walter Schmithals’s
167160 C.H. Kim, “The Influence of the Apostle Paul and Apostle Peter on Each Other, According to 2 Peter 3:15–16 and Galatians 1–2”, 신약연구 6:1 (2007), pp. 147–180.
study of the problems of the Jerusalem conference and raises some critical questions, for example Schmithals’s claim that Paul gave up on his own Jewish mission because he accepted that Peter would take on the Jewish mission parallel to Paul’s Gentile mission. Holger Zeigan
168161 R. Dillmann, “Begegnungen voller Spannung: Beobachtungen zum Mit- und Gegeneinander von Petrus und Paulus im Neuen Testament”, Studien zum Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt 33 (2008), pp. 25–39.
(2005) provides a comprehensive overview of research on the relationship between 2:1–10 and the possible parallels in Acts. Zeigan classifies research on this issue in terms of four categories: studies accepting a correlation between the version in Galatians and Acts 15, studies linking it to Acts 18:22 (a “Spätdatierung”), studies linking it to Acts 11, and studies based on correlations between it and other texts in Acts, such as 9:26–30. James B. Dabhi
169162 E. de la Serna, “La Figura de Pedro en los Escritos de Pablo”, Revista Bíblica 70:3/4 (2008), pp. 133–171.
https://doi.org/10.47182/rb.70.n3-4-2008170
(2006) believes that 2:1–10 and Acts 15:1–21 refer to the same event, but that Paul and the author of Acts present the events in different ways and that the two versions thus reflect different theologies developing in the Early Church. Based on 1:13–2:10 and Acts, Alexis Bunine
170163 M. Myllykoski, “James the Just in History and Tradition: Perspectives of Past and Present Scholarship (Part I)”, Currents in Biblical Research 5:1 (2006), pp. 73–122,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1476993X06068700
, and “James the Just in History and Tradition: Perspectives of Past and Present Scholarship (Part II)”, Currents in Biblical Research 6:1 (2007), pp. 11–98.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1476993X07080242
(2007) argues that Paul did not immediately turn to the Gentiles after his conversion. This only happened during his stay in Syria and Cilicia after which this became his cause. The reception of Gentiles by the church in Antioch then quickly led to the Jerusalem conference. Gregory Tatum
171164 U. Schnelle, “Muss ein Heide erst Jude werden, um Christ sein zu können?”, in: M. Karrer, W. Kraus and O. Merk (eds.), Kirche und Volk Gottes: Festschrift für Jürgen Roloff zum 70. Geburtstag (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2000), pp. 93–109.
(2009) points out that scholars usually harmonise the accounts of the Jerusalem conference in Galatians and Acts 15 without noting any impact that they might have had on the way in which 1 Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians are interpreted. Tatum criticises such an approach because the four texts differ substantially and offer diverse visions of Paul’s ministry; to harmonise them is thus not a good approach. Arthur A. Just Jr.
172165 M. Conti, “Il Concilio Apostolico e la Lettera ai Galati (At 15,1–29; Gal 2,1–21)”, Antonianum 77:2 (2002), pp. 235–256.
(2010) discusses the apostolic councils depicted in Galatians and Acts as watershed events from which the church of our time can learn much as to how disagreement should be handled, and consensus may be reached. John Townsend
173166 A. Lindemann, “Der Galaterbrief als historische Quelle”, in: C. Breytenbach (ed.), Paulus, die Evangelien und das Urchristentum: Beiträge von und zu Walter Schmithals: Zu seinem 80. Geburtstag herausgegeben (Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 54, 2004), pp. 731–744.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047412472_032
(2016) argues that διά (“after” or “during”) in 2:1 should not be translated as “after” (as scholars normally do), but as “during” or even “within”, which means that Paul visited Jerusalem at some stage during the fourteen-year period after his calling. If this is accepted, Paul’s letters have to be dated earlier. Hans-George Gradl
174167 W. Schmithals, “Probleme des ‘Apostelkonzils’ (Gal 2,1–10)”, HTS Teologiese Studies 53:1&2 (1997), pp. 6–35.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047412472_006
(2019) discusses the effects of the Jerusalem conference: although it was agreed that the gospel for the circumcised and the gospel for the uncircumcised were equal, subsequent events and factors (such as political situations, the growth of non-Jewish congregations and the impact of certain figures) caused the Pauline gospel to prevail. Two studies focused on the “false brethren” mentioned in 2:4: In light of Josephus’s reference in his Life to an incident in which he prevented some Jews in Galilee from forcibly circumcising two non-Jewish nobles, J.R. Harrison
175168 H. Zeigan, Aposteltreffen in Jerusalem: Eine forschungsgeschichtliche Studie zu Galater 2,1–10 und den möglichen lukanischen Parallelen (Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte 18, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2005).
(2004) explores the influence that an emerging Jewish nationalism may have had on the “false brethren” that wanted Titus to be circumcised (2:1–5). According to Harrison, Jewish nationalism may have played a role in the views of the “false brethren”. Mark D. Nanos
176169 J.B. Dabhi, “Was Paul Right? Reconstructing the Issue Narrated by Paul in Gal 2,1–10”, Bible Bhashyam 32:3 (2006), pp. 225–244.
(2005) believes that the term does not refer to Jewish Christians (thus making it an intra-group dispute), but to people from outside, “a Jewish interest group seeking to take matters into their own hands without the authority to do so”.
177170 A. Bunine, “Où, quand et comment les premiers paiens sont-ils entrés dans l’église? Essai de reconstitution historique”, Bulletin de Littérature Ecclésiastique 108:4 (2007), pp. 455–482. See also: A. Bunine, “Paul: ‘Apôtre des Gentils’ ou ... ‘des Juifs d’abord, puis des Grecs’?”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 82:1 (2006), pp. 35–68.
https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.82.1.2014920
One study focused on the expression οἱ δοκοῦντες (“those who seemed to be”): According to José Enrique Aguilar Chiu
178171 G. Tatum, “Galatians 2:1–14: Acts 15 and Paul’s Ministry in 1 Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians”, Revue Biblique 116:1 (2009), pp. 70–81.
https://doi.org/10.2143/RBI.116.1.3206456
(2015), in the four instances that Paul uses this expression in the letter, he does not always refer to the same people. In 2:2, 6b and 9 it refers to James, Peter and John, but in the case of 2:6a it alludes to a different group of people, who may be identified as the persons referred to later in 2:12 (“the ones from James”).Several studies focused on the phrase “remembering the poor” (2:10): According to Fern K.T. Clarke
179172 A.A. Just Jr., “The Apostolic Councils of Galatians and Acts: How First-Century Christians Walked Together”, Concordia Theological Quarterly 74:3/4 (2010), pp. 261–288.
(2001), careful analysis of this phrase within its wider context indicates that the focus of the Gentile mission would not only be the Jerusalem community but rather the poor in a broader sense. Stephan Joubert
180173 J. Townsend, “Misunderstood New Testament Texts: Mark 2:23 and Galatians 2:1”, in: A. Avery-Peck, C.A. Evans and J. Neusner (eds.), Earliest Christianity within the Boundaries of Judaism: Essays in Honor of Bruce Chilton (The Brill Reference Library of Judaism 49, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2016), pp. 346–356.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004310339_019
(2001) views 2:10 from the perspective of the Jewish notion of reciprocity: by recognising the content of Paul’s gospel, the leaders of the church in Jerusalem bestowed a benefit on Paul, and, accordingly, he was obligated to respond with a benefit, namely assisting with the problem of the poor in the congregation. He thus presents himself as somebody who knows how to show his gratitude. Alexander J.M. Wedderburn
181174 H.-G. Gradl, “Paulus und Jerusalem: Zur Autorität und Wirkung des ‘Apostelkonzils’ (Gal 2,1–21)”, Cristianesimo Nella Storia 40:1 (2019), pp. 11–33.
https://doi.org/10.17395/93288
(2002) uses the absence or presence of references to Paul’s collection as an aid placing Paul’s letters chronologically. In the case of Galatians, Wedderburn believes that 2:10 does not refer to the collection that Paul (later) organised and that the letter thus lacks any reference to the collection. Accordingly, Wedderburn proposes that the letter was written shortly after the Antioch incident and before Paul had plans to visit Galatia again. In dialogue with Wedderburn, Alexis V. Bunine
182175 J.R. Harrison, “Why Did Josephus and Paul Refuse to Circumcise?”, Pacifica 17:2 (2004), pp. 137–158.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1030570X0401700203
(2004) claims that Galatia was the only place where Paul organised a collection. The congregations in Macedonia and Achaia contributed spontaneously without Paul having to request them to do so.Andreas Lindemann
183176 M.D. Nanos, “Intruding ‘Spies’ and ‘Pseudo-Brethren’: The Jewish Intra-Group Politics of Paul’s Jerusalem Meeting (Gal. 2:1–10)”, in: S.E. Porter (ed.), Paul and His Opponents (Pauline Studies 2, Atlanta GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005), pp. 59–97.
(2004) critically discusses the contribution of Walter Schmithals
184177 Op. cit., p. 68.
(1994) on Paul’s “collections”. Lindemann disagrees with Schmithals’s claim that the collection was also in the background of the activities of Paul’s opponents in some of his congregations. Christoph W. Stenschke
185178 J.E. Aguilar Chiu, “οί δοκοῦντες in Gal 2,6”, Estudios Bíblicos 73:2 (2015), pp. 215–240.
(2015–2017) views Paul’s collection from two perspectives: how Paul went about overcoming the obstacles that he faced from the side of the donors in Gentile Christianity, and how he overcame those he faced from the side of the poor recipients from Jewish Christianity, as well as his own personal obstacles. Stenschke also points out how these insights might be fruitful for Christian leaders nowadays, as well as how Paul’s leadership may be viewed from the perspective of current leadership theory. Daryn Graham
186179 F.K.T. Clarke, “‘Remembering the Poor’: Does Galatians 2.10a Allude to the Collection?”, Scripture Bulletin 31:1 (2001), pp. 20–28.
(2019) focuses on the success of Paul’s collection for the believers in Jerusalem: the Great Famine lasted quite a long time and Paul’s collection was the greatest project that Christians embarked upon at that stage. It was a huge success and it does not seem as if the Jerusalem congregation needed further financial help after this. Michael L. Sweeney
187180 S. Joubert, “Die Leierskap van die Jerusalem-Kerk as Weldoeners tydens die Ontmoeting met Paulus: Galasiërs 2:10 en Antieke Joodse Resiprositeit”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 57:3/4 (2001), pp. 1213–1228.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v57i3/4.1885
(2019) views the collection from a different angle: it was an expression of Christian solidarity between Christians from different areas in Early Christianity. Sweeney also considers the missiological implications of the event, in particular the underlying values and motives that Paul expressed by his actions and what they would imply for our times. (Take note that Peter and James are not only mentioned in this pericope, but also in 1:18–20 and 2:11–21. Thus, see also the discussions of these sections elsewhere in this chapter, as well as in Volume 2.)
3.8 The Antioch incident
Like the Jerusalem conference, this incident also received a fair amount of attention. Scholars investigated it from various angles:L. Ann Jervis
188181 A.J.M. Wedderburn, “Paul’s Collection: Chronology and History”, New Testament Studies 48:1 (2002), pp. 95–110.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688502000073
(2000) discusses the event from Peter’s perspective. Peter found himself caught in the middle between two understandings of Jesus’ interpretation of the law: a prophetic understanding (an emphasis on the way in which Jesus challenged Pharisaic views of righteousness) and a Pharisaic understanding (an emphasis on the law as the highest standard for measuring righteousness). M.A. Botma, J.H. Koekemoer and A.G. van Aarde
189182 A.V. Bunine, “Paul et les Galates: La véritable occasion de la collecte”, Bulletin de Littérature Ecclésiastique 105:4 (2004), pp. 303–338.
(2000) highlight “unacceptable diversity” in Galatians: from 2:1–14, it is clear that the Sache Jesu was interpreted in diverse ways in Antioch, thus causing conflict between various Christian groups. According to Andrea J. Mayer-Haas
190183 A. Lindemann, “Der Galaterbrief als historische Quelle”, in: C. Breytenbach (ed.), Paulus, die Evangelien und das Urchristentum: Beiträge von und zu Walter Schmithals: Zu seinem 80. Geburtstag herausgegeben (Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 54, 2004), pp. 736–741.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047412472_032
(2001), the Antioch incident was caused by two opposing models of intra-church unity: a model based on covenant theology, presupposing the separation of Israel from other peoples, and a model based on the notion of a new universal fellowship brought about by Christ’s death (the view represented by Paul). Although Paul’s view was rejected by the majority in Antioch, in the long run it prevailed (after the demise of Jewish Christianity). Jerome Murphy-O’Connor
191184 W. Schmithals, “Die Kollekten des Paulus für die Christen in Jerusalem”, in: E. Axmacher and K. Schwarzwäller (eds.), Belehrter Glaube: Festschrift für Johannes Wirsching zum 65. Geburtstag (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1994), pp. 231–252.
(2001) is of the opinion that Paul attributes to his opponents in Antioch a view in 2:15–16a that they should have maintained (not the one they actually defended), namely that one is not justified by the works of the law. Justin Taylor
192185 C.W. Stenschke, “Obstacles on All Sides: Paul’s Collection for the Saints in Jerusalem Part 1”, European Journal of Theology 24:1 (2015), pp. 19–32, “Obstacles on All Sides: Paul’s Collection for the Saints in Jerusalem Part 2”, European Journal of Theology 25:1 (2016), pp. 6–17, “The Leadership Challenges of Paul’s Collection for the Saints in Jerusalem: Part I: Overcoming the Obstacles on the Side of the Gentile Christian Donors”, Verbum et Ecclesia 36:1 (2015), pp. 6–17,
http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/VE.V36I1.1406
, and “The Leadership Challenges of Paul’s Collection for the Saints in Jerusalem: Part II: Overcoming the Obstacles on the Side of the Recipients and of Paul”, Verbum et Ecclesia 38:1 (2017), 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ve.v38i1.1693
(2001) points out that the Jerusalem decrees in Acts 15:20, 29 and 21:25 may be interpreted as Noachide commandments and as being similar to decrees for resident aliens (Leviticus 17 and 18), allowing Gentiles to mix with Jews under particular conditions. According to Taylor, James and Peter displayed similar attitudes towards Gentile believers at Antioch. Alexander J.M. Wedderburn
193186 D. Graham, “The Apostle Paul and the Success of the Jerusalem Donation”, Reformed Theological Review 78:2 (2019), pp. 117–140.
(2002) believes that the disagreements between Paul and Barnabas reflected in 2:11–14 and Acts 15:36–41 refer to two separate events. Wedderburn works out the implications of such a choice, assuming that the one narrated in Acts occurred first. Frank McGuire
194187 M.L. Sweeney, “The Pauline Collection, Church Partnerships, and the Mission of the Church in the 21st Century”, Missiology 48:2 (2019), pp. 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091829619887387
(2002) claims that Peter and Paul never met and that the quarrel reflected in 2:11–21 was invented by a forerunner of Marcion in order to re-enact the events narrated in Acts 15:30–35. According to Mark D. Nanos
195188 L.A. Jervis, “Peter in the Middle: Galatians 2:11–21”, in: S.G. Wilson and M. Desjardins (eds.), Text and Artifact in the Religions of Mediterranean Antiquity: Essays in Honour of Peter Richardson (Études sur le Christianisme et le Judaïsme 9, Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2000), pp. 45–62.
(2002), “the ones of the circumcision” objected neither to what was eaten nor to the fact that Jewish believers were eating with Gentiles, but rather to the notion that the Gentiles were treated as social equals (i.e., as “righteous ones”) in spite of not being proselytes, whereas they should have been regarded as mere guests. William O. Walker Jr.
196189 M.A. Botma, J.H. Koekemoer and A.G. van Aarde, “Onaanvaarbare Verskeidenheid in Galasiërs: ἐκκλησία en συναγωγή”, HTS Teologiese Studies 56:2/3 (2000), pp. 743–777.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v56i2/3.1772
(2003) is of the opinion that the “we” in 2:15–17 does not include Paul’s opponents. Paul places himself and Peter on one side and his opponents on the other side. Michelle Slee
197190 A.J. Mayer-Haas, “Identitätsbewahrung, kirchliche Einheit und die ‘Wahrheit des Evangeliums’: Der sogenannte ‘antiochenische Zwischenfall’ im Spiegel von Gal 2,11–21”, in: J. Eckert, M. Schmidl and H. Steichele (eds.), Pneuma und Gemeinde: Christsein in der Tradition des Paulus und Johannes: Festschrift für Josef Hainz zum 65. Geburtstag (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 2001), pp. 123–148.
(2003) offers a detailed overview of events at the church in Antioch in the first century CE. One of the issues that Slee discusses is the Antioch incident. Slee thinks that the bitter debates in Antioch were caused by a difference of opinion with regard to table-fellowship between Gentiles and Jews, particularly at the eucharist, since not everybody agreed with the decisions taken at the Jerusalem conference. Magnus Zetterholm
198191 J. Murphy-O’Connor, “Gal 2:15–16a: Whose Common Ground?”, Revue Biblique 108:3 (2001), pp. 376–385. Also available in: J. Murphy-O’Connor, Keys to Galatians: Collected Essays (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2012), pp. 78–96.
(2003) explains the separation between Judaism and Christianity at Antioch by means of a social-scientific approach. Whereas previous attempts have primarily focused on ideological differences between the groups, Zetterholm shows that an interplay between ideological and sociological factors caused the event. Robert M. Price
199192 J. Taylor, “The Jerusalem Decrees (Acts 15.20, 29 and 21.25) and the Incident at Antioch (Gal 2.11–14)”, New Testament Studies 47:3 (2001), pp. 372–380.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688501000224
(2004) points out that scholars often find a negative link between Galatians and the Gospel according to Matthew, but that there is a connection between the two that is often overlooked, namely that both of them arose from the conflict between Paul (on the one side) and Peter, Barnabas and the people from James (on the other side). Paul wrote Galatians as a result of events following the Antioch incident, and the Gospel of Matthew reflects scars from the same incident. According to Simon J. Gathercole
200193 A.J.M. Wedderburn, “Paul and Barnabas: The Anatomy and Chronology of a Parting of the Ways”, in: I. Dunderberg, C. Tuckett and K. Syreeni (eds.), Fair Play: Diversity and Conflicts in Early Christianity: Essays in Honour of Heikki Räisänen (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 103, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2002), pp. 291–310.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004268210_012
(2005), Paul, Peter and James agreed that table-fellowship between Jewish and Gentile believers was allowed, even before the Antioch incident, but at Antioch Peter changed his mind and returned to his earlier views. Richard Bauckham
201194 F. McGuire, “The Posthumous Clash between Peter and Paul”, Journal of Higher Criticism 9:2 (2002), pp. 161–174.
(2005) believes that Paul wrote Galatians before the Jerusalem conference took place (narrated in Acts 15). At the stage that Paul wrote Galatians, the agreement reached between him and the three pillars of the Jerusalem church was still important, but it became an insignificant event because of the decisions taken later at the Jerusalem conference. Magnus Zetterholm
202195 M.D. Nanos, “What Was at Stake in Peter’s ‘Eating with Gentiles’ at Antioch?”, in: M.D. Nanos (ed.), The Galatians Debate: Contemporary Issues in Rhetorical and Historical Interpretation (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2002), pp. 282–318.
(2005) is of the opinion that scholars wrongly assume that the conflict at Antioch was caused by the fact that Jewish believers regarded Gentiles as ritually impure. Things were more complex than this. In general, Jews did not consider Gentiles to be ritually impure, but as morally impure (because they were involved in Graeco-Roman religious practices). It thus seems as if some of the believers in Antioch began to view Gentile believers as morally pure and as covenant partners although they were still involved in other cultic activities (because of socio-political reasons). Denis Fricker
203196 W.O. Walker Jr., “Does the ‘We’ in Gal 2.15–17 Include Paul’s Opponents?”, New Testament Studies 49:4 (2003), pp. 560–565.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688503000304
(2006) argues that although Galatians 2 and Acts 15 reflect a serious crisis in Antioch and its settlement later in Jerusalem, both texts are biased, since they do not reflect the views of the believers in favour of circumcision. Thus, we cannot use these texts nowadays to help us settle conflicts in the church. In our case they primarily help us to be aware that crises in the church are normal and part of its development. Robert Eisenman
204197 M. Slee, The Church in Antioch in the First Century CE: Communion and Conflict (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplements 244, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003), pp. 36–52.
(2008) thinks that Hippolytus’s description of the four groups amongst the Essenes helps us to understand that the sicarii were not assassins but circumcisers (i.e., using the knives of circumcision). By the time Paul wrote Galatians, there was not any difference between “the ones from James” and the sicarii. Don B. Garlington
205198 M. Zetterholm, The Formation of Christianity in Antioch: A Social Scientific Approach to the Separation between Judaism and Christianity (Routledge Early Church Monographs, London: Routledge, 2003).
(2009) argues that, according to vv. 15–16, Paul challenged one of the most important convictions of his opponents, namely that there was a distinction between Jews and Gentiles. He disagreed with such a view and believed there was no difference in Christ. John Deehan
206199 R.M. Price, “Antioch’s Aftershocks: Rereading Galatians and Matthew after Saldarini”, in: A.J. Avery-Peck, D. Harrington and J. Neusner (eds.), When Judaism and Christianity Began: Essays in Memory of Anthony J.
(2009) focuses on the tensions in Paul’s relationship with the church at Antioch and suggests that the Antioch incident placed such a burden on him that it might be the “thorn in the flesh” that he refers to in 2 Corinthians 12:7. Rainer Reuter
207
(Journal for the Study of Judaism Supplements 85, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2004), pp. 231‑250. Saldarini: Volume One: Christianity in the Beginning
(2009) believes that the expression “the ones of the circumcision” in 2:12 means “Jews” and refers to the people from James, depicting them as people who zealously observed the law. Matthias Konradt
208200 S.J. Gathercole, “The Petrine and Pauline sola fide in Galatians 2”, in: M. Bachmann and J. Woyke (eds.), Lutherische und Neue Paulusperspektive: Beiträge zu einem Schlüsselproblem der gegenwärtigen exegetischen Diskussion (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.182, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), pp. 309–327.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157299-9
(2011) agrees with scholars who date the Antioch incident in 52 CE and link it to the visit referred to in Acts 18:22. Konradt also offers additional evidence for linking the Antioch incident to this verse. John W. Taylor
209201 R. Bauckham, “James, Peter, and the Gentiles”, in: B.D. Chilton and C.A. Evans (eds.), The Missions of James, Peter, and Paul: Tensions in Early Christianity (Novum Testamentum Supplements 115, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2005), pp. 91–142.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047414742_005
(2012) contends that the idea that Paul and other Jewish believers were found to be sinners (2:17) arose from Paul and not from his opponents. Paul agreed with this statement but did not imply that Christ made them sinners. According to Markus Öhler
210202 M. Zetterholm, “Purity and Anger: Gentiles and Idolatry in Antioch”, Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion 1 (2005), pp. 1–24. See also: M. Zetterholm, “The Antioch Incident Revisited”, Journal for the Study of Paul and his Letters 6:2 (2016), pp. 249–259, where Zetterholm again emphasises that non-Jews were regarded as morally impure.
(2012), the decisive issue at the Antioch incident was ethnicity. Before “the ones from James” turned up, ethnicity did not play any role in the congregation as long as cultic and social rules were adhered to. However, the ecclesiology of the church in Jerusalem was different. The Christian congregations were regarded as the renewed Israel, but such a view was based on ethnicity and thus it was believed that certain identity markers had to characterise the congregation in Antioch, too. Michael F. Bird
211203 D. Fricker, “La crise d’Antioche et la gestion des conflits en église: Exégèse et théologie pastorale”, Revue des Sciences Religieuses 80:3 (2006), pp. 349–370.
https://doi.org/10.4000/rsr.1938
(2012) agrees with Martin Hengel that the Antioch incident reveals how the ways of the church at Antioch and at Jerusalem parted. Bird also regards the Antioch incident as the beginnings of Paulinism, in the sense that Paul’s views in this regard were expressed for the first time publicly at Antioch. Jack J. Gibson
212204 R. Eisenman, “‘Sicarii Essenes,’ ‘The Party of the Circumcision,’ and Qumran”, in: F. García Martínez (ed.), Defining Identities: We, You, and the Other in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Proceedings of the Fifth Meeting of the IOQS in Groningen (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 70, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2008), pp. 247–260.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004164147.i-283.65
(2013) concurs with scholars who are of the opinion that Peter stopped participating in table fellowship with Gentile Christians at Antioch because he was concerned about the intensification of violent nationalism in Judea and the possible negative impact the fact that he was eating with Gentiles could have on the church at Jerusalem. Gibson also argues that there was a movement in Judea that was actively advocating violence against the Romans throughout the first century CE and that this movement became more successful after the death of Agrippa.Cornelis Bennema
213205 D. Garlington, “‘Even We Have Believed’: Galatians 2:15–16 Revisited”, Criswell Theological Review 7:1 (2009), pp. 3–28.
(2013) approves of the view of Richard Bauckham (see above) that the Antioch crisis depicted in Galatians occurred before the Jerusalem conference (narrated in Acts 15). This crisis was the reason for the meeting in Jerusalem and at that meeting the church at Jerusalem provided authoritative guidance to the entire Christian movement. David I. Yoon
214206 J. Deehan, “Antioch – Paul’s Thorn in the Flesh?”, Pastoral Review 5:2 (2009), pp. 29–34.
(2014) draws attention to a textual variant in 2:12 that is often simply overlooked: ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν (“when he came”, referring to Peter) instead of ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον (“when they came”, referring to “the ones from James”). Yoon maintains that the first option represents the best reading, makes sense of both internal and external evidence and implies that Peter’s refusal to have fellowship with Gentile believers was premeditated. Michael Cosby
215207 R. Reuter, “‘Those of the Circumcision’ (Gal 2:12): Meaning, Reference and Origin”, Filología Neotestamentaria 22 (2009), pp. 149–160.
(2015) is of the opinion that one cannot take Paul’s description of Barnabas’s behaviour in 2:13 at face value. Barnabas probably had good reasons for disagreeing with Paul’s harsh approach. Since Barnabas was a bridge-builder, he was probably looking for a compromise. V. George Shillington
216208 M. Konradt, “Zur Datierung des sogenannten antiochenischen Zwischenfalls”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 102:1 (2011), pp. 19–39.
https://doi.org/10.1515/ZNTW.2011.002
(2015) links the tension between James and Paul in the Early Church to what he calls “a politics of identity” revolving around matters of religion, culture and ethnicity. Shillington believes that the Antioch incident was caused by the fact that James went back on the agreement reached at the Jerusalem conference and this damaged the relationship between Paul and Peter permanently. Mark D. Nanos
217209 J.W. Taylor, “Demonstrating Transgression by Building up the Faith: Argumentation in Galatians 2:17–18”, Bulletin for Biblical Research 22:4 (2012), pp. 547–562.
(2016) challenges the commonly held assumption that Paul’s accusation that Peter and other Jews “lived like Gentiles” (2:14) refers to eating while ignoring Jewish dietary halakhah. Nanos believes that one should rather interpret Paul’s actions against the background of Judaism and that 2:11–21 is not concerned with dietary norms but instead expresses Paul’s resistance to circumcision of Christ-believing non-Jews (like the rest of Galatians). Joel Willitts
218210 M. Öhler, “Essen, Ethnos, Identität: Der antiochenische Zwischenfall (Gal 2,11–14)”, in: W. Weiβ (ed.), Der eine Gott und das gemeinschaftliche Mahl: Inklusion und Exklusion biblischer Vorstellungen von Mahl und Gemeinschaft im Kontext antiker Festkultur (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 113, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2012), pp. 158–199.
(2016) also prefers to read the Antioch incident within Judaism. Willitts offers a narratological reading of the text, presenting “Paul as a Rabbi of Messianic Judaism instructing Jewish believers in Jesus how to live out their trust in Yeshua as Torah observant Jews”.
219211 M.F. Bird, “The Incident at Antioch (Gal 2.11–14): The Beginnings of Paulinism”, in: M.F. Bird and J. Maston (eds.), Earliest Christian History: History, Literature, and Theology: Essays from the Tyndale Fellowship in Honor of Martin Hengel (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.320, Tübingen: 2012), pp. 329–361.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151877-5
Paula Fredriksen
220212 J.J. Gibson, Peter between Jerusalem and Antioch: Peter, James and the Gentiles (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.345, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152355-7
(2017) proposes that Peter withdrew from meals in the households of Gentile believers since “the ones from James” objected to having food and wine in households containing images of pagan gods. Michael Winger
221213 C. Bennema, “The Ethnic Conflict in Early Christianity: An Appraisal of Bauckham’s Proposal on the Antioch Crisis and the Jerusalem Council”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 56:4 (2013), pp. 753–763.
(2018) points out that Paul tells several stories in Galatians 1–2. Of central importance are three episodes in which encounters between himself and Peter are recounted: 1:17–18, 2:1–10 and 2:11–14. According to Winger, this ends in 2:14 with a “paradoxical, impossible position”,
222214 D.I. Yoon, “The Antioch Incident and a Textual Variant: ‘ΗΛΘΟΝ’ or ‘ΗΛΘΕΝ’ in Galatians 2:12”, The Expository Times 125:9 (2014), pp. 432–439.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014524613490369
and Paul thus guides his audience in 2:15–21 to the dissolution of any barriers between Jews and Gentiles, invoking their own experience. Franciszek Mickiewicz
223215 M. Cosby, “When Apostolic Egos Collide: Paul, Peter and Barnabas in Galatians 2”, Conversations with the Biblical World 35 (2015), pp. 1–21.
(2019) discusses the era in Peter’s life from the point in time that he left Jerusalem in 42 CE until he arrived in Rome. On the basis of 2:11–14 and other insights from the New Testament, Mickiewicz accepts that Peter became an itinerant apostle, spent much time on missionary work and thus gained great authority in Christian circles. According to Mark A. Seifrid
224216 V.G. Shillington, James and Paul: The Politics of Identity at the Turn of the Ages (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2015).
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt12878bh
(2019), “the ones from James” were James’s representatives, but they did not belong to a conservative Jewish party. When they arrived in Antioch, Peter was seemingly afraid of being reproached or shamed and withdrew from table-fellowship with Gentile believers. James W. Thompson
225217 M.D. Nanos, “How Could Paul Accuse Peter of ‘Living Ethné-ishly’ in Antioch (Gal 2:11–21) if Peter Was Eating According to Jewish Dietary Norms?”, Journal for the Study of Paul and his Letters 6:2 (2016), pp. 199–223.
(2019) is critical of the broad consensus in Biblical scholarship that Antioch was the setting of two of the most important events in Early Christianity: the preaching of the law-free gospel to Gentiles and the parting of the ways between Paul and the Palestinian church. According to Thompson, there is very little evidence to support either of these views.(Peter and James are also mentioned in Galatians 1:18–20 and 2:1–10. Thus, see also the discussions of these sections elsewhere in this chapter, as well as in Volume 2.)
4. Possible backgrounds for interpreting Galatians
A diversity of views was expressed in this regard, but in most cases, scholars discussed Judaism as background for interpreting Galatians. Most of studies in this category focused on a specific aspect of Judaism, but some studies discussed the letter against a broader background in Judaism. Furthermore, some scholars drew attention to aspects in the Hellenistic/Graeco-Roman background that may help us to understand Galatians better.
4.1 1 Enoch
James M. Scott
226218 J. Willitts, “Paul the Rabbi of Messianic Judaism: Reading the Antioch Incident within Judaism as an Irreducibility Story”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 6:2 (2016), pp. 225–247.
(2017) sets out to answer the question of whether it makes sense to interpret Galatians from an apocalyptic perspective by comparing it with an apocalyptic text, the Epistle of Enoch (1 Enoch 92–105). Scott picks up enough similarities between the two writings in terms of form and content to claim that the two writings are analogous. Logan Williams
227219 Op. cit., p. 246.
(2018) compares the Apocalypse of the Weeks in 1 Enoch with Galatians in order to determine whether the motif of creatio e contrario that plays such an important role in Galatians is apocalyptic. Williams does not find this motif in the Apocalypse of the Weeks, which means that one cannot classify this motif in Galatians as apocalyptic. Williams thus prefers to refer to Galatians as “christomorphic”.
4.2 4 Ezra
J.P. Davies
228220 P. Fredriksen, Paul: The Pagans’ Apostle (New Haven CT/London: Yale University Press, 2017).
(2016) offers a comparison of 4 Ezra and Galatians, focusing on the themes of the two ages and salvation history. Davies points out that in some interpretations of Galatians there is sometimes “a false antithesis between the ‘punctiliar’ and the ‘linear’, between the two ages and redemptive history, that does not do justice to the way in which multiple eschatological metaphors interrelate in the apocalypses”.
229221 M. Winger, “‘Being a Jew and Living as a Gentile’: Paul’s Storytelling and the Relationship of Jews and Gentiles According to Galatians 2”, in: L. Baron, J. Hicks-Keeton and M. Thiessen (eds.), The Ways That Often Parted: Essays in Honor of Joel Marcus (Early Christianity and Its Literature, Atlanta GA: SBL Press, 2018), pp. 103–122.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv7r424g.10
To absolutize the two-ages scheme and apply it to Galatians univocally would thus ignore the complex way in which Paul uses eschatological metaphors.
4.3 Maccabees
With regard to the Antioch incident, Stephen Anthony Cummins
230222 Op. cit., p. 117.
(2001) proposes that the central point of disagreement (the question as to what distinguishes those who belong to the people of God) should be interpreted against the background of a Maccabean martyr model in Judaism. This model was Christologically reconfigured and also applied by Paul to his own ministry. In a comparison between the depiction of the law in Galatians and 4 Maccabees, Thomas Witulski
231223 F. Mickiewicz, “Działalność Misjonarska św. Piotra Poza Palestyną w Świetle Literatury Nowotestamentowej”, Collectanea Theologica 89:3 (2019), pp. 85–109.
https://doi.org/10.21697/ct.2019.89.3.03
(2015) finds Paul’s view of the law the exact opposite (“Negativfolie”) of the view of the law in 4 Maccabees. For example, Paul rejects the primacy of the law when it comes to salvation and regards it as only a preserving pedagogue whereas 4 Maccabees portrays the law as a teacher guiding people to salvation. Gerbern S. Oegema
232224 M.A. Seifrid, “Revisiting Antioch: Paul, Cephas, and ‘the Ones from James’”, Theologische Literaturzeitung 144:12 (2019), pp. 1225–1235.
(2017) finds several aspects in 1:13–14 indicating that the pre-Christian Paul had been influenced by the ideology of zeal (for God and the law) depicted in Maccabees, knew the expression “zeal” from 2 Maccabees, had been influenced by the zeal of the Maccabees and was as a Christian still influenced by Maccabean historiography in that he understood his own life in terms of an antithesis to such a type of zeal for God.
4.4 Psalms of Solomon
František Ábel
233225 J.W. Thompson, “Antioch, the Hellenists, and the Origins of Pauline Theology”, Restoration Quarterly 61:3 (2019), pp. 129–142.
(2016) investigates the Psalms of Solomon as a possible background for understanding what is called “Paul’s messianic ethics”. Ábel outlines a common messianic ethics based on the notions of mercy and merit in Pauline theology (amongst others, in 5:13–6:10) and the Psalms of Solomon, with Paul’s views on justice and mercy being integrated by the concept of obedience (linked to faith in the crucified and resurrected Messiah).
4.5 The Dead Sea Scrolls
Martin G. Abegg Jr.
234226 J.M. Scott, “A Comparison of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians with the Epistle of Enoch”, in: B.E. Reynolds and L.T. Stuckenbruck (eds.), The Jewish Apocalyptic Tradition and the Shaping of New Testament Thought (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2017), pp. 193–218.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1kgqv21.14
(2001) discusses the expression “works of the law” in 4QMMT and Paul, arguing that although it is clear that Paul did not know 4QMMT, the theological issue reflected in 4QMMT in this regard apparently survived intact until the first century CE. Heikki Räisänen
235227 L. Williams, “Disjunction in Paul: Apocalyptic or Christomorphic? Comparing the Apocalypse of Weeks with Galatians”, New Testament Studies 64:1 (2018), pp. 64–80.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0028688517000170
(2001) identifies analogies between what we have in Paul’s letters (such as his description of his former life in 1:13–14 and his views on salvation by grace) and the Dead Sea Scrolls that make it likely that Paul had personal contact with the Essenes, even with Qumran. James D.G. Dunn and James H. Charlesworth
236228 J.P. Davies, “The Two Ages and Salvation History in Paul’s Apocalyptic Imagination: A Comparison of 4 Ezra and Galatians”, in: B.C. Blackwell, J.K. Goodrich and J. Maston (eds.), Paul and the Apocalyptic Imagination (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2016), pp. 339–359. See also further on in
(2006) detect a striking link between the expression “some works of Torah” in 4QMMT and Galatians, indicating that the vocabulary that Paul uses and his way of thinking about the law was also prevalent among other Jews. Duk-Joong Kim
237
a broader sense)”.this chapter the discussion of Davies’s book in the section “Judaism (in
(2007) points out that the concept “works of the law” in 4QMMT presupposes the notion of covenantal nomism and that this seems to be similar to what Paul has in mind when using this term in Galatians. Thus, it might be the case that he made use of an existing polemical argument for his own purposes in Galatians. Adele Reinhartz
238229 Op. cit., p. 357.
(2009) investigates the way in which boundary language functioned in 4QMMT and the New Testament epistles. In the case of Galatians, Reinhartz points out that Paul, the addressees and the opponents all belonged to the same group, and that Paul wrote the letter because he viewed the opponents (“them”) as a threat to the addressees (“you”), trying to prevent the addressees from separating from his group.
Florentino García Martínez
239230 S.A. Cummins, Paul and the Crucified Christ in Antioch: Maccabean Martyrdom and Galatians 1 and 2 (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 114, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001).
(2014) shows that the way in which Paul’s thoughts on three concepts (“works of the law”, curse and justification by grace) in 3:10–14 were informed by the Biblical text was similar to the reflection on the same texts in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Jan Dušek
240231 T. Witulski, “Das Konzept des νόμος im Vierten Buch der Makkabäer und im Galaterbrief”, in: C. Breytenbach (ed.), Paul’s Graeco-Roman Context (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 277, Leuven/Paris/Bristol CT: Peeters, 2015), pp. 545–562.
(2014) compares ḥesed (“loving kindness”) in the Community Rule and χάρις (“grace”) in Galatians and argues that the theological vocabulary of Galatians is very similar to that of the Community Rule (even though the aim of the two texts is quite different). This suggests that Paul and the author of the Community Rule drew from the same imaginary world in Palestinian Judaism although Paul’s views on the matter were influenced drastically by the coming and death of Christ. Heinz-Josef Fabry
241232 G.S. Oegema, “1 and 2 Maccabees in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, in: F. Avemarie, P. Bukovec and S. Krauter, M. Tilly (eds.), Die Makkabäer (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.382, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), pp. 345–360.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155252-6
See also: G.S. Oegema, “The Reception of 1 and 2 Maccabees in the Letters of Paul”, in: S.E. Porter and C.D. Land (eds.), Paul and Scripture (Pauline Studies 10, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2019), pp. 59–74,
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391512_005
, and earlier: G.S. Oegema, “Zum jüdischen Hintergrund des Apostels Paulus nach Gal 1,13–14”, in: S. Folker (ed.), Grenzgänge: Menschen und Schicksale zwischen jüdischer, christlicher und deutscher Identität: Festschrift
(2014) offers an overview of the use of the notion of the “right time” (a moment in time determined in advance by God) in the LXX, the Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament, in particular in Mark 1:14 and Galatians 4:4. In the latter case, Fabry explains “the fullness of time” as a free, declarative act of sovereignty by the Father. Albert L.A. Hogeterp
242
(Münsteraner Judaistische Studien 11, Münster: LIT Verlag, 2002), pp. 61–74. für Diethard Aschoff
(2014) describes the Dead Sea Scrolls as “Semitic evidence for a Jewish world of thought in early Roman period Israel”
243233 F. Ábel, The Psalms of Solomon and the Messianic Ethics of Paul (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.416, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-153992-3
, enabling one to understand the Jewish orientation of the church at Jerusalem better. Hogeterp discusses three examples of language contact between them and Paul: the phrase ἱστορῆσαι Κηφᾶν (“to see Peter”, 1:18), the agreement to remember the poor (2:10) and the Antioch incident (2:11–14). Jean-Sébastian Rey
244234 M.G. Abegg Jr., “4QMMT, Paul, and ‘Works of the Law’”, in: P. Flint (ed.), The Bible at Qumran: Text, Shape and Interpretation (Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Literature, Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2001), pp. 203–216.
(2014) highlights some examples of “interdiscursivity” between the Dead Sea Scrolls and Galatians and identifies three issues in Galatians that may be understood better from such a perspective: (1) the ironic use of opposing discourse (ὀρθοποδέω [“walk straight”] in 2:14), (2) the use of doxic discourse (the quotation of Psalm 143:2 in 2:16), and (3) the way in which a counter-discourse is built around the term “works of the law”. According to Yongbom Lee
245235 H. Räisänen, “Paul’s and Qumran’s Judaism”, in: A. Avery-Peck, J. Neusner and B. Chilton (eds.), Judaism in Late Antiquity: Part Five: The Judaism of Qumran: A Systemic Reading of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Volume Two: World View, Comparing Judaisms (Leiden/Boston MA/Köln: Brill, 2001), pp. 173–200.
(2017), comparison of Galatians and 4QMMT and a mirror reading of Galatians shows that Paul’s opponents tried to persuade the Galatians to do “works of the law” to “get in” into God’s covenant, not merely to “stay in” God’s covenant (in the sense that these concepts were used by E.P. Sanders). Matthew P. van Zile
246236 J.D.G. Dunn and J.H. Charlesworth, “Qumran’s Some Works of Torah (4Q394–399 [4QMMT]) and Paul’s Galatians”, in: J.H. Charlesworth (ed.), The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls: 3. The Scrolls and Christian Origins: The Second Princeton Symposium on Judaism and Christian Origins (Waco TX: Baylor University Press, 2006), pp. 187–201.
(2017) distinguishes between two traditions regarding the eschatological fate of the nations, both going back to the same proto-rabbinic source. The tradition underlying Paul’s thought (for example, in 5:19–21) differs from that found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Hellenistic Judaism.
4.6 LXX
Andrea Damascelli
247237 D.-J. Kim, “m‘śy htwrh in 4QMMT and ἔργα νόμου in Galatians”, 신약연구 6:3 (2007), pp. 619–643.
(2001) believes that the link between curse and redemption in 3:13 goes back to the Book of Esther (LXX) where cross, curse and redemption were linked to the crucifixion of Haman and that Paul thus alludes to the cross of Haman in this verse. Bruce Chilton
248238 A. Reinhartz, “We, You, They: Boundary Language in 4QMMT and the New Testament Epistles”, in: R.A. Clements and D.R. Schwartz (eds.), Text, Thought, and Practice in Qumran and Early Christianity: Proceedings of the Ninth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, Jointly Sponsored by the Hebrew University Center for the Study of Christianity, 11–13 January, 2004 (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 84, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 89–105.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004175242.i-326.27
(2014) explains how Paul goes about using terms, allusions and quotations from LXX passages in 3:10–14 in order to prove Paul’s use of Septuagintal language. Chilton does this by discussing two aspects: references that may be identified and similarities at a linguistic level. G.K. Beale
249239 F. García Martínez, “Galatians 3:10–14 in the Light of Qumran”, in: J.-S. Rey (ed.), The Dead Sea Scrolls and Pauline Literature (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 102, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 51–67.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004230071_005
See also: F. García Martínez, “La Ley, las Obras y la Gracia: Gal 3,10–14 a la Luz de Qumran”, Revista Catalana de Teologia 35:2 (2010), pp. 489–508.
(2015) reconsiders the background of the term ἐκκλησία (“church”) in the New Testament. According to Beale, this is best understood against an LLX background, and not against a Graeco-Roman background. According to Jarvis J. Williams
250240 J. Dušek, “Ḥesed dans la Règle de la Communauté et charis dans l’Épître de Paul aux Galates”, in: J.-S. Rey (ed.), The Dead Sea Scrolls and Pauline Literature (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 102, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 89–107.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004230071_007
(2019), 3:13 should be understood against the background of ideas on martyrs found in 2 and 4 Maccabees and Daniel 3 (LXX) although Paul modified these ideas to fit his theology.
4.7 Philo
Torrey Seland
251241 H.-J. Fabry, “Zeit und Ewigkeit: Gedanken zur Kairologie in LXX und Qumran”, in: J. Elschenbroich and J. de Vries (eds.), Worte der Weissagung: Studien zu Septuaginta und Johannesoffenbarung: Martin Karrer zum 60. Geburtstag (Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte 47, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2014), pp. 97–107.
(2002) thinks that Philo’s references to zealotry in Palestine can help one to understand the zeal of a youthful Paul better. From Philo’s observations it is clear that these early zealots did not form a movement/party. They individually resisted what they regarded as gross transgressions of the Jewish law. Matthias Konradt
252242 A.L.A. Hogeterp, “Paul and the Jerusalem Church: Light from the Scrolls on Graeco-Semitic Language Contacts and Ethics of Gospel Mission”, in: J.-S. Rey (ed.), The Dead Sea Scrolls and Pauline Literature (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 102, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 261–275.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004230071_014
(2005) links Paul’s view of Abraham in Galatians to a tendency in Hellenistic Judaism (in particular, Philo) to interpret Abraham in a more inclusive sense. In Philo, one also finds a relativization of physical descendance from Abraham. Johannes Woyke
253243 Op. cit., p. 275.
(2008) draws attention to the description of “the elements of the world” as “weak and impotent” in 4:9 and points out that Philo believed that “the elements of the world” did not possess inherent creative powers – a problem that could be overcome by the law. According to Woyke, Paul denied that the law had such powers and thus classified it as also falling under “the elements of the world”. Michael B. Cover
254244 J.-S. Rey, “Les manuscrits de la Mer Morte et l’Épître aux Galates: Quelques cas d’interdiscursivité”, in: J.-S. Rey (ed.), The Dead Sea Scrolls and Pauline Literature (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 102, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 17–49.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004230071_004
(2014) reads 4:21–5:1 in the light of Philo’s practice of allegory, as well as similar Jewish traditions reflected in the Letter to the Hebrews. Cover is of the opinion that Paul’s allegoresis is similar to what is found in Philo’s Pentateuchal commentaries. Stefan Nordgaard
255245 Y. Lee, “Getting in and Staying In: Another Look at 4QMMT and Galatians”, Evangelical Quarterly 88:2 (2017), pp. 126–142.
https://doi.org/10.1163/27725472-08802003
(2014) interprets Paul’s view on the law reflected in 3:19–20 as follows: God commissioned a group of angels to ordain the law. God was thus behind the law, but he was neither responsible for, nor attached to it. According to Nordgaard, there is some similarity between Paul’s views on the law in these verses and Philo’s views on the origin of sin. Jason M. Zurawski
256246 M.P. van Zile, “The Sons of Noah and the Sons of Abraham: The Origins of Noahide Law”, Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period 48:3 (2017), pp. 386–417.
https://doi.org/10.1163/15700631-12340151
(2017) reads Paul’s interpretation of Sarah and Hagar in the light of Philo’s interpretation of the narrative. According to Zurawski, Paul associates the law with Jewish paideia in order to explain the role that it played in the past and to warn his audience against taking it up. Philo, on the other hand, associates Hagar with Greek paideia in order to encourage his readers to take up encyclical studies (although he is aware of its dangers). Gitte Buch-Hansen
257247 A. Damascelli, “Croce, Maledizione e Redenzione: Un’eco di Purim in Galati 3,13”, Henoch 23:2 (2001), pp. 227–241.
(2017) disagrees with the trend dominating New Testament scholarship as a result of Krister Stendahl’s
258248 B. Chilton, “The Curse of the Law and the Blessing of Atonement: Paul’s Deployment of Septuagintal Language”, in: W. Kraus, S. Kreuzer, M. Meiser and M. Sigismund (eds.), Die Septuaginta: Text, Wirkung, Rezeption: 4. Internationale Fachtagung veranstaltet von Septuaginta Deutsch (LXX.D), Wuppertal 19.–22. Juli 2012 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.325, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 597–610.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152890-3
essay (1963) and finds more continuation between Paul and Augustine than Stendahl (in spite of some differences). Buch-Hansen also argues that Paul’s arguments in Romans 7 and Galatians 2:16 (described as προσωποποιία en miniature [prosopopoeia in miniature]) are based on a view of original sin that was similar to what is found in Philo’s De opificio mundi. In another contribution, Buch-Hansen
259249 G.K. Beale, “The Background of ἐκκλησία Revisited”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 38:2 (2015), pp. 151–168.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X15609206
(2017) specifically focuses on Galatians and points out the similarities between Paul’s view of original sin (as can be seen in the vice list in 5:19–21 and the Sarah-Hagar-allegory) and the discourse on anthropology in Hellenistic philosophy (Philo, Epicureanism and Stoicism). Seung Hyun Lee
260250 J.J. Williams, Christ Redeemed ‘Us’ from the Curse of the Law: A Jewish Martyrological Reading of Galatians 3.13 (Library of New Testament Studies 524, London: T & T Clark, 2019).
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567692863
(2018) compares Paul’s and Philo’s understanding of Abraham and the conversion of the Gentiles and God’s Spirit. According to Lee, both Philo and Paul believed that it was God’s Spirit that enabled one to realise that Gentile religion was futile. However, unlike Philo, Paul understood faith to be focused only on God’s Son.
4.8 Judaism (in a broader sense)
Hindy Najman
261251 T. Seland, “Saul of Tarsus and Early Zealotism: Reading Gal 1,13–14 in Light of Philo’s Writings”, Biblica 83:4 (2002), pp. 449–471.
(2000) discusses the Second Temple background of the tradition that angels played a role at Sinai: such an idea is widespread in Rabbinic texts, although there are also some Rabbinic texts rejecting the idea of angelic mediation at Sinai. H. Ross Cole
262252 M. Konradt, “‘Die aus Glauben, diese sind Kinder Abrahams’ (Gal 3,7): Erwägungen zum galatischen Konflikt im Lichte frühjüdischer Abrahamtraditionen”, in: G. Gelardini (ed.), Kontexte der Schrift: Band I: Text, Ethik, Judentum und Christentum, Gesellschaft: Ekkehard W. Stegemann zum 60. Geburtstag (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2005), pp. 25–48.
(2001) disagrees with Troy W. Martin
263253 J. Woyke, “Nochmals zu den ‘schwachen und unfähigen Elementen’ (Gal 4.9): Paulus, Philo und die στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου”, New Testament Studies 54:2 (2008), pp. 221–234.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S002868850800012X
who proposed that 4:10 refers to the observance of Gentile religious practices. Cole opts for the traditional view, namely that Paul refers to the Jewish calendar. In the light of Josephus’s reference in his Life to an incident in which he prevented some Jews in Galilee from forcibly circumcising two non-Jewish nobles, J.R. Harrison
264254 M.B. Cover, “‘Now and Above; Then and Now’ (Gal. 4:21–31): Platonizing and Apocalyptic Polarities in Paul’s Eschatology”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 220–229.
(2004) explores the influence that an emerging Jewish nationalism may have had on the “false brethren” that wanted Titus to be circumcised (2:1–5). According to Harrison, Jewish nationalism may have played a role in the views of the “false brethren”. Kang-Yup Na
265255 S. Nordgaard, “Paul and the Provenance of the Law: The Case of Galatians 3,19–20”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 105:1 (2014), pp. 64–79.
https://doi.org/10.1515/znw-2014-0004
(2005) believes that the Antioch incident is best understood as a first-century intra-Jewish debate about what Jewishness entails. Accordingly, the story on the conversion of Izates found in Josephus’s Antiquities can help one to understand this incident better. Ullrich Mell
266256 J.M. Zurawski, “Mosaic Torah as Encyclical paideia: Reading Paul’s Allegory of Hagar and Sarah in Light of Philo of Alexandria’s”, in: K.M. Hogan, M. Goff and E. Wasserman (eds.), Pedagogy in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (Early Judaism and its Literature 41, Atlanta GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2017), pp. 283–308.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1qqhfvv.16
(2006) argues that, from the perspective of genre, Galatians is an example of a “Gemeindeleitungsbrief” (a letter giving advice to a congregation) and Paul followed conventions about such letters in early Judaism. Honora Howell Chapman
267257 G. Buch-Hansen, “Beyond the New Perspective: Reclaiming Paul’s Anthropology”, Studia Theologica 71:1 (2017), pp. 4–28.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0039338X.2017.1308303
(2006) proposes that one should understand Josephus’s and Paul’s rejection of circumcision (as happens in Galatians) as a response to the policy of forced circumcision that was developed during the Hasmonean period. Paul was thus not merely reacting against a particular Scriptural tradition. Kelli S. O’Brien
268258 K. Stendahl, “The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West”, Harvard Theological Review 56:3 (1963), pp. 199–215.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816000024779
(2006) disagrees with the wide-spread perception amongst scholars that Jews in the New Testament era regarded people that were crucified as cursed by God because of Deuteronomy 21:22–23 and that this is the background of Galatians 3:13. O’Brien points out that this idea is not supported by textual evidence. Steven di Mattei
269259 G. Buch-Hansen, “Early Conceptions of Original Sin: Reading Galatians through Philo’s De opificio mundi”, in: J.R. Dodson and A.W. Pitts (eds.), Paul and the Greco-Roman Philosophical Tradition (Library of New Testament Studies 527, London/Oxford/New York NY: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2017), pp. 221–243.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567678362.ch-011
(2006) is of the opinion that Paul’s interpretative strategy in 4:21–31 is best understood in terms of Jewish reading strategies seeking to eschatologise the law. Jörg Frey
270260 S.H. Lee, “A Comparison between Paul and Philo’s Understanding of Abraham, the Conversion of Gentiles and the Spirit of God”, 신약논단 25:3 (2018), pp. 795–830.
(2007) offers a detailed overview of Paul’s conception of himself, his piety, the missionary strategy that he followed, the way he preached, the exegetical methods that he used and his views on eschatology. Frey suggests that much of this is similar to what can be found in other Jewish groups of the first century CE and that all of this helps one to appreciate Paul’s Jewish identity. According to Rodrigo J. Morales
271261 H. Najman, “Angels at Sinai: Exegesis, Theology and Interpretive Authority”, Dead Sea Discoveries 7:3 (2000), pp. 313–333.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156851700509977
(2009), Paul’s reference to the Spirit in 3:14 is based on a Jewish tradition found in Deutero-Isaiah, the Words of the Luminaries (from Qumran) and the Testament of Judah, according to which the Spirit and divine blessing are depicted as an indication of the end-time redemption of Israel. Birgit van der Lans
272262 H.R. Cole, “The Christian and Time-Keeping in Colossians 2:16 and Galatians 4:10”, Andrews University Seminary Studies 39:2 (2001), pp. 273–282.
(2010) elucidates Paul’s argument on Abraham in Galatians 3 and 4 by means of Jewish texts in which Abraham was regarded as either the father of many nations or as father of the Jews. James W. Thompson
273263 T.W. Martin, “Pagan and Judeo-Christian Time-Keeping Schemes in Gal 4.10 and Col 2.16”, New Testament Studies 42:1 (1996), pp. 105–119.
(2011) analyses the way in which Paul formed his congregations in a moral sense. One of the texts that Thompson investigates is the vice and virtue lists in 5:19–23. According to Thompson, Paul’s approach to moral formation was analogous to what happened in moral instruction in Hellenistic Judaism. Christopher R. Bruno
274264 J.R. Harrison, “Why Did Josephus and Paul Refuse to Circumcise?”, Pacifica 17:2 (2004), pp. 137–158.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1030570X0401700203
(2013) traces the Jewish background of the phrase “God is one” (used in 3:20 and Romans 3:30). Bruno finds that in Jewish literature the phrase normally functioned as a boundary marker (Zechariah 14:9 is an exception). Paul uses it in a different way, as the basis for the notion of the unity of Jews and Gentiles, which might imply that Zechariah 14:9 may have served as the background to his reference to God in v. 20. J.C. de Vos
275265 K.-Y. Na, “The Conversion of Izates and Galatians 2:11–14: The Significance of a Jewish Dispute for the Christian Church”, Horizons in Biblical Theology 27:2 (2005), pp. 56–78.
(2014) compares 4:21–31 and 2 Baruch 4:1–7, texts that are both trying to make sense of an existence without the earthly Jerusalem and the temple and points out several differences between them. In a study of Paul and the Gentile problem, Matthew Thiessen
276266 U. Mell, “Der Galaterbrief als frühchristlicher Gemeindeleitungsbrief”, in: U. Mell and D. Sänger (eds.), Paulus und Johannes: Exegetische Studien zur paulinischen und johanneischen Theologie und Literatur (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.198, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), pp. 353–373.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157304-0
(2016) argues that Paul’s views in 4:21–31 (and on the law in Romans 2) fit in well with the thinking of some Jews of his time who rejected the idea that Gentiles could become Jews by being circumcised and adopting the law. In this passage, Paul equates Gentiles opting for circumcision with Ishmael and his opponents with Hagar. J.P. Davies
277267 H. Howell Chapman, “Paul, Josephus, and the Judean Nationalistic and Imperialistic Policy of Forced Circumcision”, Ilu Revista de Ciencias de las Religiones 11 (2006), pp. 131–155.
(2016) offers a detailed evaluation of the “apocalyptic Paul” as suggested in some Pauline circles by examining such claims in the light of 1 Enoch, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch and Revelation. Davies confirms that Paul may indeed be regarded as an apocalyptic thinker but raises critical questions about the way in which this is handled in recent approaches. Joel Willitts
278268 K.S. O’Brien, “The Curse of the Law (Galatians 3.13): Crucifixion, Persecution, and Deuteronomy 21.22–23”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 29:1 (2006), pp. 55–76.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X06068383
(2017) maintains that the dispute at Antioch (2:11–21) was of a halakhic nature and did not so much focus on soteriology. Paul and Peter accepted the same gospel but drew different halakhic conclusions from it. Stefan Bosman
279269 S. di Mattei, “Paul’s Allegory of the Two Covenants (Gal 4.21–31) in Light of First-Century Hellenistic Rhetoric and Jewish Hermeneutics”, New Testament Studies 52:1 (2006), pp. 102–122.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688506000063
(2018) discusses Paul’s use of Jewish traditions in 1 Corinthians 10:4, Galatians 6:16 and Romans 5:12. In the case of Galatians 6:16, Bosman uses Isaiah 54 and 1 Enoch 1 to argue for a Jewish exegetical trajectory significantly similar to Paul’s statement. Jill Hicks-Keeton
280270 J. Frey, “Paul’s Jewish Identity”, in: J. Frey, D.R. Schwartz and S. Gripentrog (eds.), Jewish Identity in the Greco-Roman World/Jüdische Identität in der griechisch-römischen Welt (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 71, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2007), pp. 283–321.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004158382.i-435.58
(2019) compares Paul’s spatial imagery in 4:21–5:1 (the two Jerusalems) with that of some Hellenistic Jewish writings (Joseph and Aseneth, Tobit and 2 Maccabees) and points out that Paul and these authors all rhetorically reconfigure space, although Paul’s way of doing so differs since he links God’s plan to Jesus.
4.9 The Targums and Rabbinic literature
According to Nikolaus Walter
281271 R.J. Morales, “The Words of the Luminaries, the Curse of the Law, and the Outpouring of the Spirit in Gal 3,10–14”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 100:2 (2009), pp. 269–277.
https://doi.org/10.1515/ZNTW.2009.0014
(2000), the metaphor “pillars” (used by Paul in 2:9 to refer to James, Peter and John) should be interpreted against the background of rabbinic tradition. It thus does not refer primarily to their leadership role in the Jerusalem congregation, but rather to their outstanding commitment to the law (“als … hervorragende Gesetzesfromme”
282272 B. van der Lans, “Belonging To Abraham’s Kin: Genealogical Appeals To Abraham as a Possible Background for Paul’s Abrahamic Argument”, in: M. Goodman, G.H. van Kooten and J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten (eds.), Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham (Themes in Biblical Narrative 13, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill 2010), pp. 307–318.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004216495_021
). A. Andrew Das
283273 J.W. Thompson, Moral Formation According to Paul: The Context and Coherence of Pauline Ethics (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2011).
(2003) agrees with E.P. Sanders’s view that it is wrong to describe the self-understanding of the Jews of Paul’s time as legalistic. Yet, Das also thinks that after the Damascus event, Paul realised that obedience to the law constituted some kind of legalistic perfectionism. Devorah Steinmetz
284274 C.R. Bruno, “God Is One”: The Function of eis ho theos as a Ground for Gentile Inclusion in Paul’s Letters (Library of New Testament Studies 497, London: Bloomsbury/T & T Clark, 2013).
(2005) compares Paul’s views on justification by deeds with the conclusion of Sanhedrin Makkot and points out that although there is a great difference in the way in which the two respond to the question as to how one can live before God if one does not keep the law perfectly, there are also conspicuous similarities between the arguments used to offer an answer to the problem. From a rabbinic perspective, Jacob Neusner
285275 J.C. de Vos, “Jerusalem: Why on Earth Is It in Heaven? A Comparison between Galatians 4:21–31 and 2 Baruch 4:1–7”, in: E. van der Steen, J. Boertien and N. Mulder-Hymans (eds.), Exploring the Narrative: Jerusalem and Jordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages (Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 583, London/New Delhi/New York NY/Sydney: Bloomsbury, 2014), pp. 327–338.
(2005) explains the positions of James, Peter and Paul (as reflected in 2:1–14) in terms of three perspectives of the kairos: the end-time has not yet come (James), the end-time has commenced but has not yet come to fulfilment (Peter) and the end-time has come (Paul). Yaakov Azuelos
286276 M. Thiessen, Paul and the Gentile Problem (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 73–101.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190271756.001.0001
(2009) points out that angels are not mentioned in Deuteronomy 32:2–3 (on the giving of the law) in Targum Onkelos and argues that their omission may reflect an awareness that the idea that the angels acted as mediators at the giving of the law could be used to minimise the importance of the law (as Paul does in 3:19). Based on three case studies discussed in detail, Ishay Rosen-Zvi
287277 J.P. Davies, Paul among the Apocalypses? An Evaluation of the “Apocalyptic Paul” in the Context of Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic Literature (Library of New Testament Studies 562, London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2016). See also the discussion of Davies’ contribution on Galatians and 4 Ezra earlier on in this chapter.
(2017) maintains that the way in which Paul argues on topics such as justification through the law, the situation of people who are not circumcised and how God’s favouritism works, indicates that he was responding to proto-rabbinic notions of which he was aware. Serge Ruzer
288278 J. Willitts, “One Torah for Another: The Halakhic conversion of Jewish Believers: Paul’s Response to Peter’s Halakhic Equivocation in Galatians 2:11–21”, in: T.A. Wilson and P.R. House (eds.), The Crucified Apostle: Essays on Peter and Paul (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.450, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), pp. 21–45.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155610-4
(2018) examines Paul’s liberation language in Galatians against the broader Jewish tradition and argues that the way in which he linked the law to liberty suggests that he should be viewed as a witness to such a way of thinking in Judaism around the middle of the first century CE and attested in later rabbinic sources.
4.10 Philosophy: Stoicism
Troels Engberg-Pedersen
289279 S. Bosman, “Paul’s Use of Jewish Traditions”, Tyndale Bulletin 69:1 (2018), pp. 157–160.
(2000) detects a similar basic thought structure underlying both Stoic ethics and Pauline literature, which may be summarised as I → X → S, where I stands for the initial involvement of the addressees, X for the conversion and S for the new state of communality. In another study, an investigation of 5:13–27 and Romans 7: 7–24, Engberg-Pedersen
290280 J. Hicks-Keeton, “Putting Paul in His Place: Diverse Diasporas and Sideways Spaces in Hellenistic Judaism”, Journal of the Jesus Movement in Its Jewish Setting 6 (2019), pp. 1–21.
(2011) finds a Stoically informed idea of personhood in Paul, both for believers and non-believers: “In Paul, a human ‘person’ is a being who is self-reflectively capable of turning one’s own gaze on one’s own body in order to change it. In the unredeemed ‘person’ the gaze will not always be successful. In the redeemed ‘person,’ by contrast, it is able genuinely to transform the body.”
291281 N. Walter, “Die ‘als Säulen Geltenden’ in Jerusalem – Leiter der Urgemeinde oder exemplarisch Fromme?”, in: M. Karrer, W. Kraus and O. Merk (eds.), Kirche und Volk Gottes: Festschrift für Jürgen Roloff zum 70. Geburtstag (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2000), pp. 275–306.
In a third study, Engberg-Pedersen
292282 Op. cit., p. 88.
(2013) discusses the movement from sin to virtue in 5:13–26 from two perspectives: the characteristics of sin and how Paul views the movement from sin to virtue (“the fruit of the Spirit”). In the discussion, Engberg-Pedersen points out similarities between Paul’s views and Stoic and Aristotelian views. George H. van Kooten
293283 A.A. Das, Paul and the Jews (Library of Pauline Studies, Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2003).
(2010) draws attention to two issues in 4:21–31 – Paul’s criticism of ethnic descent and the notion of dual citizenship (Hagar vs. Sarah) – and similar strategies of argumentation in Graeco-Roman philosophy, in particular the way in which Stoics tried to depoliticise politics. Joseph R. Dodson
294284 D. Steinmetz, “Justification by Deed: The Conclusion of Sanhedrin-Makkot and Paul’s Rejection of Law”, Hebrew Union College Annual 76 (2005), pp. 133–187.
(2017) compares the way in which Paul uses the metaphor of crucifixion in Galatians and Seneca’s use of it in De vita beata and detects striking similarities (for example, that both use it against opponents and in contexts where they mention sinful passions), although there are also differences (for example, the fact that Paul uses it to refer to Christ’s victory whereas Seneca uses it to refer to his own moral defeat). Craig S. Keener
295285 J. Neusner, “What, Exactly, Is Israel’s Gentile Problem? Rabbinic Perspectives on Galatians 2”, in: B.D. Chilton and C.A. Evans (eds.), The Missions of James, Peter, and Paul: Tensions in Early Christianity (Novum Testamentum Supplements 115, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2005), pp. 275–306.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047414742_009
(2017) compares the items in Paul’s virtue list (5:22–23) with their use by other intellectuals of his time, in particular the Stoics. Keener concludes: “Like many other moral teachers, Paul made use of lists of vices and virtues. For Paul in Gal 5, however, these virtues reflect God’s indwelling character rather than studied compliance with an external code.”
296286 Y. Azuelos, “my nṯn ’t hṯwrh lyšrl”, Beit Mikra 54:2 (2009), pp. 94–104.
4.11 Ancient world (in a broad sense)
In this section contributions that do not fit in any of the sections above are discussed.Bernard Dupuy
297287 I. Rosen-Zvi, “Pauline Traditions and the Rabbis: Three Case Studies”, Harvard Theological Review 110:2 (2017), pp. 169–194.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816017000037
(2001) draws attention to a formula from Greek antiquity, attributed to Thales of Miletus, in which distinctions are made that are similar to those in 3:28. Dupuy suggests that this tradition passed into popular piety and that Paul might have been aware of such a tradition. Lucien Legrand
298288 S. Ruzer, “Paul as an Early Witness to the Jewish Notion of Liberation-through-Torah”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 41:1 (2018), pp. 82–94.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064x18788980
(2001) explains Paul’s missionary strategy in terms of ancient geographical notions. According to Legrand, at the Jerusalem meeting, ideas on which parts of the world could be regarded as Judaized or not, played a role in the decisions that were made. From 2:9 it is clear that Europe (regarded as not Judaized) was given to Paul as a missionary field, whereas Peter, James and John received the parts in the diaspora in Africa and the East as their missionary fields. According to Basil S. Davis
299289 T. Engberg-Pedersen, Paul and the Stoics (Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox, 2000).
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567661098.ch-003
J. Louis Martyn reacted to Engberg-Pedersen’s book, to which Engberg-Petersen responded. See: J.L. Martyn, “De-Apocalypticizing Paul: An Essay Focused on Paul and the Stoics by Troels Engberg-Pedersen”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 24:4 (2002), pp. 61–102,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0202400403
and T. Engberg-Pedersen, “Response to Martyn”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 24:4 (2002), pp. 103–114.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0202400404
(2002), Paul’s reference to Christ becoming a curse (3:13) contains an allusion to Roman devotio, i.e., a human sacrifice who died in order to break a curse. J. Albert Harill
300290 T. Engberg-Pedersen, “A Stoic Concept of the Person in Paul? From Galatians 5:17 to Romans 7:14–25”, in: C.K. Rothschild and T.W. Thompson (eds.), Christian Body, Christian Self: Concepts of Early Christian Personhood (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.284, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), pp. 85–112.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151861-4
(2002) believes that Paul’s reference to “putting on Christ” (3:27) is best understood in terms of the toga virilis coming of age-ceremony in Roman households. On this occasion, the youth were warned against succumbing to the flesh – a warning that is also found in Galatians. John T. Fitzgerald
301291 Op. cit., p. 110.
(2003) offers a thorough and very useful overview of the way in which testaments and last wills functioned in the Graeco-Roman world (“heirs” are mentioned in 4:1). Anne Davis
302292 T. Engberg-Pedersen, “Von der ‘Sünde’ zur ‘Tugend’: Worum geht es eigentlich bei Paulus?”, Zeitschrift für Neues Testament 16:32 (2013), pp. 37–47.
(2004) thinks that Paul used neither narrative allegory nor typology in 4:21–5:1. Rather, he utilised an ancient way of argumentation according to which literary devices were used to draw attention to key concepts in the Hebrew Scriptures. Susan Elliott
303293 G. H. van Kooten, “Philosophical Criticism of Genealogical Claims and Stoic Depoliticization of Politics: Greco-Roman Strategies in Paul’s Allegorical Interpretation of Hagar and Sarah (Gal 4:21–31)”, in: M. Goodman, G.H. van Kooten and J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten (eds.), Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham (Themes in Biblical Narrative 13, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2010), pp. 361–385.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004216495_024
(2008) reads Galatians against an Anatolian cultic background and argues that Paul’s concern about circumcision was primarily motivated by an aversion to the cult of the Mother of the gods and the similarity between circumcision and the self-castration performed by her followers, the galli. According to John H. Elliott
304294 J.R. Dodson, “Paul and Seneca on the Cross: The Metaphor of Crucifixion in Galatians and De Vita Beata”, in: J.R. Dodson and D.E. Briones (eds.), Paul and Seneca in Dialogue (Ancient Philosophy & Religion 2, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017), pp. 247–266.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004341364_013
(2008), Paul’s opponents accused him of using the evil eye – a widespread belief in the ancient world – and Paul defends himself against this accusation in Galatians. In turn, he accuses his opponents of using the evil eye in the congregations in Galatia. Craig A. Evans
305295 C.S. Keener, “A Comparison of the Fruit of the Spirit in Galatians 5:22–23 with Ancient Thought on Ethics and Emotion”, in: L.F. Dow, C.A. Evans and A.W. Pitts (eds.), The Language and Literature of the New Testament: Essays in Honor of Stanley E. Porter’s 60th Birthday (Biblical Interpretation Series 150, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill Academic Publishers, 2017), pp. 574–598.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004335936_026
(2008) lists over 200 parallels between Paul’s letters and non-Jewish sources. Seventeen verses/sections from Galatians are mentioned. Furthermore, Evans discusses the following aspects that are relevant for this letter: the pedagogue metaphor (3:24–25), the running metaphor (2:2) and the virtue ἐγκράτεια (“self-control”, 5:23). Boris Repschinski
306296 Op. cit., p. 593.
(2010) points out that Paul formulates his criticism of the Galatians in the light of Hellenistic notions of friendship. Accordingly, he depicts his ministry as an apostle as that of someone operating as an equal of the Galatians whereas the best that his opponents can offer is a patron-client relationship (and the worst a situation of spiritual slavery). Nina E. Livesey
307297 B. Dupuy, “‘Ni Juif ni Grec’: Sur une formule controversée de saint Paul”, Istina 46:3 (2001), pp. 229–233.
(2010) investigates the treatment of circumcision by authors from the 2nd century BCE to the 1st CE. Livesey finds that circumcision was a malleable symbol: there in no universally accepted explanation for the Jewish practice of circumcision. Its meaning depends on the literary context within which it is referred to. Gesila Nneka Uzukwu
308298 L. Legrand, L’apôtre des nations? Paul et la stratégie missionnaire des églises apostoliques (Paris: Cerf, 2001).
(2010) disagrees with scholars who are of the opinion that the opposites in 3:28 were influenced by Rabbinic blessings of gratitude that, in turn, were influenced by expressions of gratitude in Greek writings. According to Uzukwu, such pairs of opposites were widely used in the Hellenistic world and they may have had some influence on this verse, but what is found in this verse is a response to a particular situation. Philip Kern
309299 B.S. Davis, Christ as Devotio: The Argument of Galatians 3:1–14 (Lanham MD: University Press of America, 2002).
(2011) considers the way in which Paul’s rhetoric of the cross works in Galatians in terms of its cultural context. Kern highlights the fact that it was a shared cultural symbol in Paul’s world and that Jews and Romans reacted in similar ways to crucifixion. James R. Edwards
310300 J.A. Harrill, “Coming of Age and Putting on Christ: The toga virilis Ceremony, Its Paraenesis, and Paul’s Interpretation of Baptism in Galatians”, Novum Testamentum 44:3 (2002), pp. 252–277.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156853602320249473
(2011) reads 5:12 against the cult of the Mother Goddess that was widespread in Galatia and Phrygia. From this perspective it is clear that Paul depicted those promoting circumcision in the Christian congregations as just as offensive as the priests of this cult who were emasculated. Jonathan A. Draper
311301 J.T. Fitzgerald, “Last Wills and Testaments in Graeco-Roman Perspective”, in: J.T. Fitzgerald, T.H. Olbricht and M. White (eds.), Early Christianity and Classical Culture: Comparative Studies in Honor of Abraham J. Malherbe (Novum Testamentum Supplements 110, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2003), pp. 637–672.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047402190_031
(2011) examines the way in which the topos of the two ways functioned in Galatians and in Didache 1–6 and 16 and finds that one can identify differences in terms of the way in which it was used in the two communities in terms of Christology, eschatology and views of ethics and the law. John Granger Cook
312302 A. Davis, “Allegorically Speaking in Galatians 4:21–5:1”, Bulletin for Biblical Research 14:2 (2004), pp. 161–174.
https://doi.org/10.2307/bullbiblrese.14.2.0161
(2012) draws attention to four artefacts from ancient Campania that may help one to understand crucifixion in Roman times better and to grasp how scandalous Paul’s gospel of the cross would have sounded to people from his time: a notice in Pompeii advertising the crucifixion of people at Cumae, the lex Puteolana regulating private and public crucifixions, the lex Cumana regulating crucifixion at Cumae and a graffito of a crucified person in a taberna in Puteoli. Eliezer González
313303 S. Elliott, Cutting Too Close for Comfort: Paul’s Letter to the Galatians in Its Anatolian Cultic Context (Library of New Testament Studies 248, London/New York: T & T Clark International, 2008).
(2014) believes that Paul’s view of metamorphosis (mentioned in 4:19, Romans 12:2, 2 Corinthians 3:18 and Philippians 2:6–7) would have been understandable in both Hellenistic and Jewish (in particular apocalyptic) contexts but that Paul also moves beyond existing views on the matter, in particular by emphasising the universal and cosmological effects of the transformation taking place. Gitte Buch-Hansen
314304 J.H. Elliott, “Paul, Galatians and the Evil Eye”, in: J.H. Neyrey and E.C. Stewart (eds.), The Social World of the New Testament: Insights and Models (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2008), pp. 223–234. See also earlier: J.H. Elliott, “Paul, Galatians, and the Evil Eye”, Currents in Theology and Mission 17:4 (1990), pp. 262–273, and later: J.H. Elliott, Beware the Evil Eye: The Evil Eye in the Bible and the Ancient World: Volume 3: The Bible and Related Sources (Eugene OR: Cascade, 2016), pp. 212–263. For a description of the methodological approach underlying this study, see: J.H. Elliott, “Social-Scientific Criticism: Perspective, Process and Payoff: Evil Eye Accusation at Galatia as Illustration of the Method”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 67:1 (2011), pp. 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v67i1.858
(2014) discusses baptism and notions on generation/genealogy in Galatians, showing how Paul navigates between Jewish notions of genealogy and Hellenistic ideas about generation, in particular Aristotelian ideas about generation as illustrated in De generatione animalium. This Aristotelian notion is combined with the idea that Christ literally became Abraham’s seed. Steven Muir
315305 C.A. Evans, “Paul and the Pagans”, in: S.E. Porter (ed.), Paul: Jew, Greek, and Roman (Pauline Studies 5, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2008), pp. 117–139.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004171596.i-370.49
(2014) explains Paul’s statement that Christ was publicly exhibited as crucified before the eyes of the Galatians (3:1) by referring to Roman rhetoric, street announcements, graffiti and the way in which crucifixions were conducted. All of these indicate that Paul wanted his audience to experience his preaching on Christ’s crucifixion in such a way that they would remember it.W. Marshall Johnston
316306 B. Repschinski, “Gemeindekrise und Apostelamt im Galaterbrief”, Zeitschrift für Katholische Theologie 132:3 (2010), pp. 312–331.
(2015) proposes that 5:12 should be understood in the light of the Mother Goddess cult and draws attention to the story of Attis who castrated himself for her. Paul is thus referring to castration in this verse. In a study on divine honours for the Caesars, Bruce W. Winter
317307 N.E. Livesey, Circumcision as a Malleable Symbol (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.295, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151638-2
(2015) suggests that some of the Galatian Christians may have felt it necessary to be circumcised so that they could be exempted from the imperial cult – a privilege that was available to (circumcised) Jews. Karin B. Neutel
318308 For Rabbinic writings, see: G.N. Uzukwu, “Gal 3,28 and Its Alleged Relationship to Rabbinic Writings”, Biblica 91:3 (2010), pp. 370–392. For a discussion of possible Greek influence, see: G.N. Uzukwu, “The Problem with the Three Expressions of Gratitude Found in Greek Writings and Their Alleged Relationship to Gal 3:28”, Cristianesimo nella Storia 31:3 (2010), pp. 927–944. See also later: G.N. Uzukwu, The Unity of Male and Female in Jesus Christ: An Exegetical Study of Galatians 3.28c in Light of Paul’s Theology of Promise (Library of New Testament Studies: International Studies on Christian Origins 531, London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2015), pp. 3–31.
(2015) situates the opposites in 3:28 within discussions in the first century CE about creating a utopian community in which divisions would not play a role anymore. Neutel points out how Paul’s view differs from and overlaps with such notions. This verse is also one of the passages that Ilaria L.E. Ramelli
319309 P. Kern, “The Cultural Context of Paul’s Gospel: The Cross and Suffering in Galatians”, The Reformed Theological Review 70:2 (2011), pp. 135–154.
(2016) refers to in a discussion of the legitimacy of slavery from Ancient Judaism to Late Antiquity. Ramelli points out that Paul’s statement seems to be a total reversal of Aristotle’s notion of superiority based on race and gender. Christoph Heil
320310 J.R. Edwards, “Galatians 5:12: Circumcision, the Mother Goddess, and the Scandal of the Cross”, Novum Testamentum 53:4 (2011), pp. 319–337.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156853611X578275
(2016) is of the opinion that the interpretation of rituals in Early Christianity was influenced by notions of piety in the mystery cults. In Galatians, this can be seen in Paul’s reference to circumcision as castration (5:12), having as its background the emasculation associated with the Cybele cult, as well as the clothing referred to in the context of baptism (3:27), having as its background clothing metaphors in Hellenistic mystery cults. Bradley Trick
321311 J.A. Draper, “The Two Ways and Eschatological Hope: A Contested Terrain in Galatians 5 and the Didache”, Neotestamentica 45:2 (2011), pp. 221–251.
(2016) proposes that Paul’s views of διαθήκη (“testament” or “covenant”) in Galatians 3–4 are best understood in terms of a Hellenistic testament by which God adopted Abraham, with “children” in 3:7 referring to Jews, “children of promise” (4:28) referring to Gentiles, and “seed” (3:16) referring to Christ and the union of Gentiles and Jews in Christ (3:29). Suzan J.M. Sierksma-Agteres
322312 J.G. Cook, “Crucifixion as Spectacle in Roman Campania”, Novum Testamentum 54:1 (2012), pp. 68–100.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156853611X589651
(2016) supports the option of interpreting Paul’s use of the expression “faith of Christ” as a purposeful ambiguity by investigating his imitation language against the background of the way in which imitation functioned in the Hellenistic-Roman world, in particular in philosophical training. This suggests that one should interpret the expression as shorthand for believers mimetically moving in faith/faithfulness through Christ towards God. George Philip
323313 E. González, “Paul’s Use of Metamorphosis in Its Graeco-Roman and Jewish Contexts”, DavarLogos 13:1 (2014), pp. 57–76.
(2017) explains Paul’s approach to the common meal against the background of practices in Graeco-Roman and Jewish culture. Whereas such meals were generally used to create boundaries, one can see from Galatians and Corinthians that Paul viewed this practice as a way to resist ethnic boundaries and factionalism. Mark D. Nanos
324314 G. Buch-Hansen, “Paulus i Aristoteles’ Hønsegård: Dåb og Genealogi i Galaterbrevet”, Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 77:1 (2014), pp. 9–26.
(2017) reads the Antioch incident against the behavioural norms of Graeco-Roman banquets. In terms of such a background, 2:11–21 may be regarded as a subversive narrative, since placement was assigned in an indiscriminate way. John S. Kloppenberg
325315 S. Muir, “Vivid Imagery in Galatians 3:1: Roman Rhetoric, Street Announcing, Graffiti, and Crucifixions”, Biblical Theology Bulletin 44:2 (2014), pp. 76–86.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146107914526523
(2017) compares Paul’s collection to the fiscal practices of Greek cities and private associations. According to Kloppenborg, Paul’s collection is best compared to the ἐπιδοσις (“free giving”), a practice used by associations and cities to raise funds for extraordinary projects. Lexie Harvey
326316 W.M. Johnston, “Pagans and Galatians: Reading Galatians 5:12”, in: W.M. Johnston and D.J. Crosby (eds.), A Dangerous Mind: The Ideas and Influence of Delbert L. Wiens (Eugene OR: Wipf & Stock, 2015), pp. 117‑128.
(2018) is of the opinion that Paul addresses a hybrid audience in Galatians and tries to bridge two realms: Judaism and Roman imperialism. Accordingly, one finds elements of both Jewish prophecy (for example, the claim to have received a revelation from God) and Greek παρρησία ([“frankness”], for example, truth-telling, frank speech and pointing out the imminent danger to his readers) in the letter, resulting in “parrhesia as a Christian mode, with anti-prudent, prophetic rhetorical features”.
327317 B.W. Winter, Divine Honours for the Caesars: The First Christians’ Responses (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2015), pp. 226–249. According to Klaus Vibe
328318 K.B. Neutel, A Cosmopolitan Ideal: Paul’s Declaration “Neither Jew nor Greek, Neither Slave nor Free, nor Male and Female” in the Context of First Century Thought (Library of New Testament Studies 513, London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2015).
(2019), the ancient elite used the notion of παιδεία (“upbringing” or “training”) to justify their own superiority, thus making it a type of cultural capital. From 6:14–15 it is clear that circumcision – another type of cultural capital – was of no importance to Paul. The same applied to παιδεία. Kyu Seop Kim
329319 I.L.E. Ramelli, Social Justice and the Legitimacy of Slavery: The Role of Philosophical Asceticism from Ancient Judaism to Late Antiquity (Oxford Early Christian Studies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), p. 102.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198777274.001.0001
(2019) interprets the notion of freedom in 5:13 against the practice of manumission in Roman society. For Paul, freedom did not imply autonomy since certain relationships had to be continued. This helps one to make sense of the paradox between freedom and slavery in this verse. Christina Eschner
330320 C. Heil, “Beschneidung und Taufe im Galaterbrief: Zur Bedeutung der Mysterienkulte in einem frühchristlichen Grundsatzstreit”, Keryx 4 (2016), pp. 87–98.
(2019) thinks that it is not correct to explain Paul’s view of Christ’s death in 2:20 against the background of the notion of atonement. It should rather be interpreted in terms of the Greek notion of apotropaic death, the giving of oneself for the fatherland or for another person.Bruce W. Longenecker
331321 B. Trick, Abrahamic Descent, Testamentary Adoption, and the Law in Galatians: Differentiating Abraham’s Sons, Seed, and Children of Promise (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 169, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2016).
(2019) argues that Early Christianity practised benefaction but that it differed from similar practices in that era in terms of form, the motivation for it, its resources and the people who benefitted from it. From 6:10 and 1 Thessalonians 5:15 it is clear that Paul expected believers to practise benefaction to support other believers but also to benefit other people. Joel L. Watts
332322 S.J.M. Sierksma-Agteres, “Imitation in Faith: Enacting Paul’s Ambiguous pistis Christou Formulations on a Greco-Roman Stage”, International Journal of Philosophy and Theology 77:3 (2016), pp. 119–153.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2016.1231076
(2019) proposes that Jesus’ death followed a well-known Roman and Jewish model of people sacrificing themselves, called devotio. In Galatians, Paul uses this model to depict Jesus’ death as an event that was premeditated and which he chose himself in order to bring about changes to the cosmos. Martin Meiser
333323 G. Philip, Paul and Common Meal: Re-Socialization of the Christian Community (Biblical Hermeneutics Rediscovered 7, New Delhi: Christian World Imprints, 2017).
(2020) compares the way in which Paul represents himself in Galatians with insights from ancient rhetorical handbooks and speeches delivered by Cicero. Meiser points out that Paul’s self-representation in the letter would probably not have been experienced by his readers as something unusual. Furthermore, in terms of rhetorical practice in Paul’s time, it is clear that it was not regarded as inappropriate to utilise negative effects, as long as they served the purpose of the argument. Eric Smith
334324 M.D. Nanos, “Reading the Antioch Incident (Gal 2:11–21) as a Subversive Banquet Narrative”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 7:1/2 (2017), pp. 26–52.
https://doi.org/10.5325/jstudpaullett.7.1-2.0026
(2020) believes that insight into the ways in which space was organised by ancient maps aids us in understanding Paul’s notions of territory, why he was defensive about his territory (as may be seen in Galatians and 2 Corinthians) and how he decided which places to visit.
4.12 Archaeology
David L. Balch
335325 J.S. Kloppenborg, “Fiscal Aspects of Paul’s Collection for Jerusalem”, Early Christianity 8:2 (2017), pp. 153–198.
https://doi.org/10.1628/186870317X14950055760629
Shorter version: J.S. Kloppenborg, “Paul’s Collection for Jerusalem and the Financial Practices in Greek Cities”, in: T.R. Blanton IV and R. Pickett (eds.), Paul and Economics: A Handbook (Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press, 2017), pp. 307–332.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1kgqtgr.16
(2003) focuses on the question of how people living in Graeco-Roman houses would have received Paul’s message of Christ crucified and investigates the ways in which the suffering of Isis/Io was portrayed in frescoes in Pompeii, Roman houses and in the Temple of Isis in Pompeii. Balch believes that this shows that the way in which tragic art portrayed pathos would have served as a meaningful cultural context for understanding Paul’s message about Christ’s suffering. Timothy H. Lim
336326 L. Harvey, “Commitment to the Truth: Parrhesiastic and Prophetic Elements of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, Res Rhetorica 5:1 (2018), pp. 21–34.
https://doi.org/10.29107/rr2018.1.2
(2004) explains Paul’s statement 3:15 that a διαθήκη (usually translated as “will”) may not be annulled or added to once it has been ratified by referring to P. Yadin 19, in which a certain Judah transfers all that he owns to his daughter – half of it immediately and the other half after his death. In the light of this example, Lim proposes that one should rather translate διαθήκη as “deed of gift”. Christian Laes
337327 Op. cit., p. 33.
(2009) investigates 23 Greek inscriptions mentioning pedagogues and finds that they were usually slaves, that they usually stayed in contact with the children they tended to (even after the children had reached adulthood), that some of these children in later life expressed their gratitude for the services rendered by the pedagogues, that pedagogues took pride in their jobs and that the term “pedagogue” eventually took on the meaning of instructor/teacher. Natalie R. Webb
338328 K. Vibe, “The Cultural Capital of This World and Paul’s Theology of New Creation: Paul’s Gospel and Greek paideia”, European Journal of Theology
(2016) uses evidence from Pompeii to explain that people from Paul’s time constantly felt threatened by evil and thus continually felt the need for protection. If Galatians is read with this insight, it seems that Paul’s opponents promoted law observance as a solution to the problem of warding off evil, whereas Paul offers a different apotropaic solution, the message of the cross. Bruce W. Longenecker
339
28:2 (2019), pp. 99–109.
https://doi.org/10.5117/EJT2019.2.002.VIBE
(2018) explains the relationality between free people and slaves as displayed in two villas in Oplontis (north of Pompeii) and points out that the statement about neither slave nor free in 3:28 goes against the grain of the ideology displayed here. However, Longenecker also remarks that what is expressed in 3:28 was an idealised ideology not easily put into practice, as other Christian texts testify. Laura Salah Nasrallah
340329 K.S. Kim, “Freedom and Enslavement in Galatians 5:13 in Light of the Roman Social and Legal Context”, 신약연구 18:4 (2019), pp. 574–607.
https://doi.org/10.24229/kents.2019.18.4.006
(2019) draws attention to an issue that is often overlooked when missionary (and other) journeys in the New Testament times are considered, namely that such journeys could have been disruptive to the people who had to receive the visitors. Nasrallah discusses a transport requisition inscription from Sagallasos (dated 14–19 CE) that may assist one in understanding such matters in Galatians better, for example that Peter’s visit to Antioch, as well as that of “the ones from James” (2:12–13), and even Paul’s own visits to the Galatians (4:13–14) imposed on and disturbed the locals. Mark Wilson
341330 C. Eschner, “‘Der mich geliebt und sich selbst “für” mich hingegeben hat’ (Gal 2,20): Die griechische Konzeption des Unheil abwendenden Sterbens als zentrale Heilskategorie des Galaterbriefes”, in: D.S. du Toit, C. Gerber and C. Zimmermann (eds.), Sōtēria: Salvation in Early Christianity and Antiquity: Festschrift in Honour of Cilliers Breytenbach on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday (Novum Testamentum Supplements 175, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2019), pp. 307–329.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004396883_017
(2020) discusses three recent discoveries (a road monument, the Stadiasmus Patarensis, and two Latin inscriptions from Perge) that seem to indicate that cities such as Perge and Attalia were part of Galatia at the time that Paul was on his missionary journeys in that part of the Roman Empire. This implies that at the time of Paul’s missionary journeys the province of Galatia stretched from the Mediterranean Sea to central Anatolia.331 B.W. Longenecker, “‘Do Good to All’ (Galatians 6.10): Assets, Capital, and Benefaction in Early Christianity”, in: S. Walton and H. Swithinbank (eds.), Poverty in the Early Church and Today: A Conversation (London/New York NY: Bloomsbury/T & T Clark, 2019), pp. 43–53. 332 J.L. Watts, Jesus as Divine Suicide: The Death of the Messiah in Galatians (Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2019). 333 M. Meiser, “Die Selbstpräsentation des Paulus im Galaterbrief im Vergleich mit antiker rhetorischer und epistolographischer Praxis”, Sacra Scripta 18:1 (2020), pp. 7–35. 334 E. Smith, “Paul’s Map and Territory: Rethinking the Work of the Apostle in Light of Ancient Cartography”, Horizons in Biblical Theology 42:1 (2020), pp. 90–107.
https://doi.org/10.1163/18712207-12341404
335 D.L. Balch, “The Suffering of Isis/Io and Paul’s Portrait of Christ Crucified (Gal. 3:1): Frescoes in Pompeian and Roman Houses and in the Temple of Isis in Pompei”, The Journal of Religion 83:1 (2003), pp. 24–55.
https://doi.org/10.1086/491222
336 T.H. Lim, “The Legal Nature of Papyrus Yadin 19 and Galatians 3:15”, in: A.J. Avery-Peck, D. Harrington and J. Neusner (eds.), When Judaism and Christianity Began: Essays in Memory of Anthony J. Saldarini: Volume II: Judaism and Christianity in the Beginning (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 85, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2004), pp. 361–376. 337 C. Laes, “Pedagogues in Greek Inscriptions in Hellenistic and Roman Antiquity”, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 171 (2009), pp. 113‑122. 338 N.R. Webb, “Powers and Protection in Pompeii and Paul: The Apotropaic Function of the Cross in the Letter to the Galatians”, in: B.W. Longenecker (ed.), Early Christianity in Pompeian Light: People, Texts, Situations (Minneapolis MN: Fortress Publishers, 2016), pp. 93–122.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1c84g2b.7
339 B.W. Longenecker, “Slave and Free: Ideal Ideologies in Vesuvian Villas and in Galatians 3:28”, in: M.C. Parsons and R. Walsh (eds.), “A Temple Not Made with Hands”: Essays in Honor of Naymond H. Keathley (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2018), pp. 85–102. 340 L.S. Nasrallah, Archaeology and the Letters of Paul (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019).
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199699674. 001.0001
341 M. Wilson, “Galatia in Text, Geography, and Archaeology”, Biblical Archaeology Review 46:4 (2020), pp. 54–56. Chapter 2:
Text-Critical, Linguistic, Stylistic
and Translation IssuesText-critical, linguistic, stylistic and translation issues continue to receive attention, albeit not to the same degree as was the case with the issues discussed in the previous chapter.
1. Text-critical issues
A variety of contributions on text-critical issues was made, most of which focused on particular manuscripts/versions or specific verses of the letter:Three studies offered historical overviews of the development of the text of Galatians or of the Pauline Letters: Stephen C. Carlson
11 S.C. Carlson, The Text of Galatians and Its History (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.385, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-153324-2
(2015) uses insights from a mathematical model called “Cladistics” to compare 94 witnesses to Galatians (1624 variation units) to make a contribution to the genealogy of text-types. This is used to present a newly reconstructed text of Paul’s letter (differing from the Nestle-Aland text), as well as an overview of the history of the text. Vevian Zaki
22 V. Zaki, “The Textual History of the Arabic Pauline Epistles: One Version, Three Recensions, Six Manuscripts”, in: M.L. Hjälm (ed.), Senses of Scripture, Treasures of Tradition: The Bible in Arabic among Jews, Christians and Muslims (Biblia Arabica 5, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017), pp. 392‑424.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004347403_017
(2017) offers an overview of the textual history of the Arabic Pauline Letters. Zaki examines one version of the Arabic Pauline Letters (referred to as ArabGr1) that is represented in three recensions and six manuscripts. Chris S. Stevens
33 C.S. Stevens, History of the Pauline Corpus in Texts, Transmissions and Trajectories: A Textual Analysis of Manuscripts from the Second to the Fifth Century (Texts and Editions for New Testament Study 14, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2020).
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004429376
(2020) focuses specifically on the second to the fifth centuries, from the period of P46 to the period of Codex Claromontanus. By means of a new approach (systemic functional linguistics), Stevens explains the history of the Pauline corpus during this period.Two further contributions should be noted before studies focusing on specific manuscripts or versions are discussed: Tommy Wasserman
44 T. Wasserman, “A Short Textual Commentary on Galatians”, in: D. Gurtner, J. Hernández Jr. and P. Foster (eds.), Studies on the Text of the New Testament and Early Christianity: Essays in Honour of Michael W. Holmes (New Testament Tools, Studies and Documents 50, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2015), pp. 345–371.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004300026_017
(2015) published a brief textual commentary on Galatians, based on the approach of Reasoned Eclecticism. Wasserman pays particular attention to instances where a reading differs from Nestle-Aland 28 or the SBL edition.
H.A.G. Houghton
,
C.M. Kreinecker
,
R.F. MacLachlan
and
C.J. Smith
55 H.A.G. Houghton, C.M. Kreinecker, R.F. MacLachlan and C.J. Smith, The Principal Pauline Epistles: A Collation of Old Latin Witnesses (New Testament Tools, Studies and Documents 59, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2019), pp. 390–436.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004390492_010
(2019) published a collation of all the Old Latin witnesses to Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians and Galatians, differing in numerous ways from the standard version of the Vulgate. Several scholars made contributions on text-critical issues of particular manuscripts or versions:Matthew R. Steinfeld
66 M.R. Steinfeld, “Preliminary Investigations of Origen’s Text of Galatians”, in: H.A.G. Houghton (ed.), Early Readers, Scholars and Editors of the New Testament: Papers from the Eighth Birmingham Colloquium on the Textual Criticism of the New Testament (Texts and Studies 11, Piscataway NJ: Gorgias Press, 2014), pp. 107–118.
https://doi.org/10.31826/9781463236496-010
(2014) investigates Origen’s text of Galatians, but instead of deciding on citations in terms of a modern, ideal version of the text, Steinfeld prefers to let the citations “speak for themselves”. Steinfeld also argues that Origen cited in a variety of ways and that this inconsistency must be kept in mind when one studies citations in his commentary on the letter. Joohan Kim
77 J. Kim, “A Study on the Text-Type of Gothic New Testament Versions: Galatians as a Case Study”, 신약연구 13:1 (2014), pp. 102–129.
(2014) critically investigates the current consensus that the Vorlage of the Gothic versions of the New Testament was an early Byzantine text-type. Kim argues that this is not true, since there are a number of readings that show resemblance to the Alexandrian and Western text-types. H.A.G. Houghton
88 H.A.G. Houghton, “The Biblical Text of Jerome’s Commentary on Galatians”, The Journal of Theological Studies 65:1 (2014), pp. 1–24.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/flt211
(2014) analyses the Biblical text of Jerome’s commentary on Galatians and compares it with other textual readings, thereby showing the complex ways in which the Biblical text was transmitted in this commentary. Houghton also points out that the significance of non-Vulgate variants in Jerome’s commentary has been underestimated before. In another contribution, Houghton
99 H.A.G. Houghton, “A Longer Text of Paul: Romans to Galatians in Codex Wernigerodensis (VL 58)”, in: D. Gurtner, J. Hernández Jr. and P. Foster (eds.), Studies on the Text of the New Testament and Early Christianity: Essays in Honour of Michael W. Holmes (New Testament Tools, Studies and Documents 50, Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2015), pp. 329–344.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004300026_016
(2015) discusses the way in which the text of Paul’s letters from Romans to Galatians is represented in Codex Wernigerodensis (VL 58). Houghton concludes that this manuscript should not be regarded as a witness to the Old Latin tradition of Paul’s letters. Carla Fulluomini
1010 C. Falluomini, The Gothic Version of the Gospels and Pauline Epistles: Cultural Background, Transmission and Character (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Textforschung 46, Berlin/New York NY: De Gruyter, 2015).
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110334692
(2015) offers a detailed investigation of the cultural background, transmission and character of the Gothic version of the Gospels and the Pauline Epistles. Terrance Callan
1111 T. Callan, “Reading the Earliest Copy of Galatians”, Conversations with the Biblical World 35 (2015), pp. 304–326.
(2015) explains how the perceptions of readers of Galatians in P46 would have differed from those who had the original version. They would have found greater prominence given to God and less to Christ, less emphasis on negative views of Paul, that Paul was being depicted as more positive towards the law, and would have found the expression “in Christ” used less often. Joel D. Estes
1212 J.D. Estes, “Reading for the Spirit of the Text: Nomina sacra and πνεῦμα Language in P46”, New Testament Studies 61:4 (2015), pp. 566–594.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688515000259
(2015) also discusses P46 but focuses on a different issue: whether the term πνεῦμα (“Spirit”) is written as a nomen sacrum or not. Estes finds that there is no constant pattern and that one can thus not make any deductions with regard to the scribe’s understanding of the term by merely looking at the way in which it was written. Ladislav Tichý
1313 L. Tichý, “What Do the Variants of P46 Say? Tested on 1 Corinthians and Galatians”, in: J. Dušek (ed.), The Process of Authority: The Dynamics in Transmission and Reception of Canonical Texts (Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Studies 27, Berlin/Boston MA: De Gruyter, 2016), pp. 241–252.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110399394-015
(2016) tries to determine if the variants in 1 Corinthians and Galatians in P46 can tell us anything of the way in which the scribe understood Paul’s letters. Tichý notes that it looks as if the manuscript was written professionally, but that it also seems as if the scribe did not always understand Paul’s thought correctly. However, this does not mean that the scribe was a proponent of a specific theological or Christological view. Jordan Almanzar
1414 J. Almanzar, “Codex Z in Galatians: Employing and Inventing Readings in the Fourth Century”, Biblische Notizen 175 (2017), pp. 83–93.
(2017) distinguishes between readings from Galatians in Codex Z that may be dated to the fourth century CE (“invented readings”) and those that are older (“employed readings”). According to Almanzar, Codex Z offers us a view of a version of Paul’s letters functioning in the Western part of the church at that stage. Based on three examples from Tertullian (1:6, 2:14 and 3:27), Benjamin D. Haupt
1515 B.D. Haupt, “Tertullian’s Text of Galatians”, Studia Patristica 96 (2017), pp. 23–28.
(2017) argues that Tertullian probably did not make use of an already existing Latin translation of the text of Galatians, but that he translated the parts that he needed from the Greek himself. Eleanor Dickey
1616 E. Dickey, “A Re-Examination of New Testament Papyrus P99 (Vetus Latina AN glo Paul)”, New Testament Studies 65:1 (2019), pp. 103–121.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0028688518000243
(2019) re-examines P99 (a Greek-Latin glossary in pap. Chester Beatty AC 1499), containing many extracts from Paul’s letters, amongst others 89 from Galatians, and proposes several corrections to existing editions of the text. Dickey also suggests that P99 was not based directly on a manuscript of Paul’s letters, but on an early Christian work quoting from Paul. Quite a number of studies were published on particular verses or pericopes in Galatians: According to Enno Edzard Popkes
1717 E.E. Popkes, “‘Bevor einer von Jakobus kam ...’: Anmerkungen zur textkritischen und theologiegeschichtlichen Problematik von Gal 2,12”, Novum Testamentum 46:3 (2004), pp. 253–264.
https://doi.org/10.1163/1568536041528196
(2004), P46 represents the original reading of 2:12 (τινα [“a certain one”] instead of τινας [“certain ones”], and ἦλθεν [“he came”] instead of ἦλθον ["they came”]), which means that the Antioch incident was caused by the arrival of a single person and not of a group of people. Hans Förster
1818 H. Förster, “Ein Papyrusfragment mit sahidischem Text aus dem Galaterbrief (Gal 4,20c–24a. 25c–28): Edition von P.Vindob. K. 7598”, in: R. Pillinger (ed.), Mitteilungen zur Christlichen Archäologie 15 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2009), pp. 81–84.
https://doi.org/10.1553/micha15s77
(2009) discusses a papyrus fragment (P.Vindob. K. 7698) containing a Sahidic text of Galatians 4:20c–24a and 25c–28, written in the seventh or eighth century CE. Förster points out that this fragment helps one to understand the approach followed in the translation of the text. It was regarded as more important to keep to the meaning of the text than to translate the Greek words exactly. Jermo van Nes
1919 J. van Nes, “‘Faith(Fulness) of the Son of God’? Galatians 2:20b Reconsidered”, Novum Testamentum 55:2 (2013), pp. 127–139.
https://doi.org/10.1163/15685365-12341418
(2013) draws attention to the significance of a variant reading of 2:20b: ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ (“in faith of God and Christ I live”). This reading suggests that the expression “faith of Christ” should be interpreted as an objective genitive. David I. Yoon
2020 D.I. Yoon, “The Antioch Incident and a Textual Variant: ‘ΗΛΘΟΝ’ or ‘ΗΛΘΕΝ’ in Galatians 2:12”, The Expository Times 125:9 (2014), pp. 432–439.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014524613490369
(2014) notes a textual variant in 2:12 that is often simply overlooked: ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν (“when he came”, referring to Peter) instead of ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον (“when they came”, referring to the people from James). Yoon argues that the first option is the best reading, making sense of both internal and external evidence and that it implies that Peter’s refusal to have fellowship with Gentile believers was premeditated. Jason A. Staples
2121 J.A. Staples, “Altered Because of Transgressions? The ‘Law of Deeds’ in Gal 3,19a”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 106:1 (2015), pp. 126–135.
https://doi.org/10.1515/znw-2015-0007
(2015) explains the text-critical alternative “deeds” instead of “transgressions” in 3:19a as “1) an orthodox corruption to exclude Marcionite and other demiurgic interpretations and 2) an important example of an early Latin harmonization impacting the readings of P46 and other early manuscripts”.
2222 Op. cit., p. 127.Stephen C. Carlson
2323 S.C. Carlson, “‘For Sinai Is a Mountain in Arabia’: A Note on the Text of Galatians 4,25”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 105:1 (2014), pp. 80–101.
https://doi.org/10.1515/znw-2014-0005
(2014) discusses the text-critical problems in 4:25. Carlson argues that 4:25a originally read τὸ γὰρ Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ (“for Mount Sinai is in Arabia”) and that it was a marginal note and should be reflected as such in critical editions. Christopher M. Tuckett
2424 C.M. Tuckett, “The Text of Galatians 4:25a”, in: D. Gurtner, J. Hernández Jr. and P. Foster (eds.), Studies on the Text of the New Testament and Early Christianity: Essays in Honour of Michael W. Holmes (New Testament Tools, Studies and Documents 50, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2015), pp. 372–388.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004300026_018
(2015) discusses the same issue in detail and concludes that the first part of the original reading of 4:25 was τὸ γὰρ Σινᾶ (“for Sinai …”). Tuckett also points out that this reading is attested to by some early manuscripts of the letter and that one thus does not need to make a case for conjectural emendation. According to Jens Herzer
2525 J. Herzer, “‘Alle Einer in Christus’: Gal 3,28b und kein Ende? Ein Vorschlag”, in: M. Labahn (ed.), Spurensuche zur Einleitung in das Neue Testament: Eine Festschrift im Dialog mit Udo Schnelle (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 271, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), pp. 125–142.
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666540691.125
(2017), the original reading of 3:28d (corrected in Sinaiticus but found in P46 and in Alexandrinus) might have been “for all of you belong to Christ Jesus”. Herzer points out that this reading fits in well with the logic of vv. 26–29. Jan Lambrecht
2626 J. Lambrecht, In Search of Meaning II: Another Year of Reflection on the New Testament (2017–2018) (Beau Bassin: Scholars’ Press, 2018), pp. 319‑322.
(2018) agrees with Herzer, providing further arguments in support of such a view. Taras N. Dyatlik
2727 T.N. Dyatlik, “Methodology of the Research of the Conflation in the Epistle to Galatians”, Cхід 155:3 (2018), pp. 74–77.
https://doi.org/10.21847/1728-9343.2018.3(155).139835
(2018) investigates conflation in the text of Galatians by examining the eight longest variants in the letter (in 1:19, 2:5, 4:7 [2x], 4:14 [2x], 4:25 and 6:17). Tentative suggestions are made as to whether they should be regarded as conflations, difflations or variants caused by addition and omission. In another contribution, Dyatlik
2828 T.N. Dyatlik, “The Conflation in the Epistle to Galatians 4:7”, Gileya 134 (2018), pp. 216–220.
(2018) specifically discusses the issue of conflation in 4:7 and argues that it is safest to assume that the textual variants in this verse were caused by neither conflation nor difflation, nor by addition or omission. According to Dyatlik, there are some variants that were caused in other ways, such as by doctrinal changes or syntactical improvement.
2. Linguistic issues
Under this heading grammatical, syntactic and semantic issues are considered.Michael Bachmann
2929 M. Bachmann, “ΙΕΡΟΣΟΛΥΜΑ und ΙΕΡΟΥΣΑΛΗΜ im Galaterbrief”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 91:3 (2000), pp. 288–289. Also available in: M. Bachmann, Von Paulus zur Apokalypse – und weiter: Exegetische und rezeptionsgeschichtliche Studien zum Neuen Testament (samt englischsprachigen Summaries) (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus/Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 91, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), pp. 71–72.
(2000) disagrees with Jerome Murphy-O’Connor’s
3030 J. Murphy-O’Connor, “ΙΕΡΟΣΟΛΥΜΑ/ΙΕΡΟΥΣΑΛΗΜ in Galatians”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 90:3/4 (1999), pp. 280–281.
argument that Ἱεροσόλυμα (“Jerusalem”) in 1:17–18 is neuter plural, since Paul’s addressees are Gentile-Christians. Bachmann points out that this does not hold for Ἰερουσαλήμ (“Jerusalem”, feminine singular) in 4:25–26. Moisés Silva
3131 M. Silva, Interpreting Galatians: Explorations in Exegetical Method (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2001 [1996], 2nd edition), pp. 53–79.
(2001) discusses several issues: whether there is a difference in meaning between ἀπό (“of”) and διά (“through”) in 1:1, between ἕτερος (“other”) and ἄλλος (“other”) in 1:6–7 and between βάρος (“burden”) and φορτίον (“burden”) in 6:2 and 6:5; semantic ambiguity in 3:4 (πάσχω, “suffer” or “experience”) and in 1:16 (προσανατίθημι, “submit” or “consult”); syntactical issues (the interpretation of the genitive in 1:12: διʼ ἀποκαλύψεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, “through the revelation of Jesus Christ”), as well as examples where verbal tense and aspect might be important. According to Troy W. Martin
3232 T.W. Martin, “The Brother Body: Addressing and Describing the Galatians and the Agitators as ἀδελφοί”, Biblical Research 47 (2002), pp. 5–18.
(2002), the term “brothers” in 4:28 and 5:13a should not be read as a vocative but rather as a nominative. This helps one to grasp Paul’s strategy in Galatians as trying to foster unity between Jewish and non-Jewish believers on the basis of the freedom that they have in Christ. Mario Cifrak
3333 M. Cifrak, “‘Da Ne Činite To Što Budete Htjeli.’ (Gal 5,17)”, Bogoslovska Smotra 74:3 (2005), pp. 635–651.
(2005) offers the following solution for the hypotactic problem in 5:17: The final clause (ἵνα μὴ ταῦτα ποιῆτε, “so that you do not do the things”) depends on the hypothetical relative clause (ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε, “what you want”). Paul thus warns the Galatians against returning to slavery to the elements of the world, i.e., being under the law. Rosario Pierri
3434 R. Pierri, “Due Note Filologiche di Greco Biblico”, Liber Annuus 56 (2006), pp. 311–316.
https://doi.org/10.1484/J.LA.2.303647
(2006) makes two philological notes, one on Acts 2:5 and the other one on Galatians 4:6. In the latter case, Pierri points out that the term ὅτι (“that” or “because”) may be taken in three ways: causal, declarative and demonstrative-effective. Pierri offers arguments for accepting the first option. Régis Burnet
3535 R. Burnet, “Les ambiguïtés du ‘nous’ dans l’Épître aux Galates”, in: D. Marguerat (ed.), Regards croisés sur la Bible: Études sur le point de vue: Actes du IIIe colloque international du Réseau de Recherche en Narrativité Biblique, Paris, 8–10 Juin 2006 (Lectio Divina, Belgium: Cerf, 2007), pp. 467–476.
(2007) discusses the ambiguity of Paul’s use of “we” in Galatians and provides two possible reasons: first, everyone could identify with the “we”, whether they were Gentiles who had just become Christians or Jews who adhered to something that was still part of Judaism, and, second, it reflects Paul’s conviction that humanity should be regarded as a unity, before and after the coming of grace. Yon-Gyong Kwon
3636 Y.-G. Kwon, “‘In Vain’? A Reading of Paul’s Argument in Galatians”, 신약연구 6:2 (2007), pp. 351–385.
(2007) focuses on Paul’s use of the expression “in vain” in Galatians. The way in which he uses it is taken by Kwon as an indication that he did not use it as a rhetorical ploy. He was genuinely afraid: that the faith of the Galatians would be in vain, that his own ministry had been in vain and that Christ had died in vain. C. Kingsley Barrett
3737 C.K. Barrett, “The Interpretation of Galatians 5,11”, in: J.E. Aguilar Chiu, F. Manzi, F. Urso and C.Z. Estrada (eds.), “Il Verbo di Dio è Vivo”: Studi sul Nuovo Testamento in Onore del Cardinale Albert Vanhoye, S.I. (Analecta Biblica 165, Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2007), pp. 315–321.
(2007) notes various attempts to interpret 5:11 and suggests that one should take the second clause (τί ἔτι διώκομαι; “why am I still being prosecuted?”) not as the apodosis of the conditional sentence but rather as a parenthesis. The third clause thus serves as the apodosis: if Paul still preached circumcision, the offense of the cross has been removed. Gordon D. Fee
3838 G.D. Fee, “Paul’s Use of Locative ἐν in Galatians: On Text and Meaning in Galatians 1.6; 1.16; 2.20; 3.11–12, and 3.26”, in: C.J. Roetzel and R.L. Foster (eds.), The Impartial God: Essays in Biblical Studies in Honor of Jouette M. Bassler (New Testament Monographs 22, Sheffield: Phoenix Press, 2007), pp. 170–185.
(2007) draws attention to the way in which Paul uses the locative ἐν (“in/through”) in 1:6, 1:16, 2:20, 3:11–12 and 3:26. According to Fee, with the exception of 1:16, the emphasis is on how the Galatians should maintain their life in Christ, not on how they have become his followers. David J. Armitage
3939 D.J. Armitage, “An Exploration of Conditional Clause Exegesis with Reference to Galatians 1,8–9”, Biblical Interpretation 88:3 (2007), pp. 365–392.
(2007) proposes an integrative approach to the interpretation of conditional clauses in which one does not only make use of syntactical and semantic perspectives, but also of speech act theory. Armitage illustrates how such an approach may be used by applying it to the two conditional clauses found in 1:8–9. Don Garlington
4040 D. Garlington, “Paul’s ‘Partisan ἐκ’ and the Question of Justification in Galatians”, Journal of Biblical Literature 127:3 (2008), pp. 567–590.
(2008) investigates Paul’s use of the “partisan ἐκ [“from”]” in Galatians and argues that he uses it to indicate source and belonging, with the notion of belonging getting the most emphasis. For Garlington, this supports the view of the New Perspective on justification. Jan Lambrecht
4141 J. Lambrecht, “Critical Reflections on Paul’s ‘Partisan ἐκ’ as Recently Presented by Don Garlington”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 85:1 (2009), pp. 135–141.
https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.85.1.2040699
(2009) disagrees with Garlington. According to Lambrecht, Garlington misses the notion of instrumentality in 2:16 and in other passages in the letter. Furthermore, in cases where ἐκ indicates belonging, it does not indicate realm or sphere. Wayne Walden
4242 W. Walden, “Galatians 3:28: Grammar Observations”, Restoration Quarterly 51:1 (2009), pp. 45–50. See also later: W. Walden, “Galatians 3:28: Grammar, Text, Context, and Translation”, Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood 15:1 (2010), pp. 23–26.
(2009) highlights two grammatical oddities in Galatians 3:28 – the use of the verb ἔνειμι (“is”) and the gender of the adjectives. According to Walden, ἔνειμι is used to draw attention to a matter and it should not be regarded as a synonym of εἰμί (“is”). This implies that this verse cannot be used to support the notion of egalitarianism. Michael Bachmann
4343 M. Bachmann, “Bemerkungen zur Auslegung zweier Genitivverbindungen des Galaterbriefs: ‘Werke des Gesetzes’ (Gal 2,16 u.ö.) und ‘Israel Gottes’ (Gal 6,16)”, in: M. Bachmann and B. Kollmann (eds.), Umstrittener Galaterbrief: Studien zur Situierung und Theologie des Paulus-Schreibens (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 106, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2010), pp. 95–118. Also available in: M. Bachmann, Von Paulus zur Apokalypse – und weiter: Exegetische und rezeptionsgeschichtliche Studien zum Neuen Testament (samt englischsprachigen Summaries) (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus/Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 91, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), pp. 277‑295.
(2010) believes that the expression “works of the law” (used three times in 2:16 and also in 3:2, 5 and 10) is to be interpreted as referring to halakhot distinguishing Jews from Gentiles. Wim Hendriks
4444 W. Hendriks, “εὐθέως Beyond the Temporal Meaning”, Filología Neotestamentaria 25 (2012), pp. 21–35.
(2012) discusses three problematic uses of εὐθέως (“immediately”) in the New Testament, one of which occurs in Galatians (1:15–17: … εὐθέως οὐ προσανεθέμην σαρκὶ καὶ αἵματι, “I did not immediately consult flesh and blood”). According to Hendriks, in this instance, εὐθέως should be understood as an adverb of manner and means “rightly, naturally”. John Anthony Dunne
4545 J.A. Dunne, “Suffering in Vain: A Study of the Interpretation of ΠΑΣΧΩ in Galatians 3.4”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 36:1 (2013), pp. 3–16.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X13480086
(2013) provides a history of interpretation of πάσχω (“suffer” or “experience”) in 3:4 and argues on the basis of lexical, thematical and contextual grounds that it is best interpreted as referring to suffering. David I. Yoon
4646 D.I. Yoon, “Prominence in New Testament Discourse: Galatians 1,11–2,10 as a Test Case”, Filología Neotestamentaria 26 (2013), pp. 3–25.
(2013) investigates the way in which linguistic features are used in 1:11–2:10 to convey prominence. According to Yoon, Paul primarily uses aspect to emphasise the notion that God commissioned him to preach the gospel. Mood and voice are also used to achieve this but not to the same extent. Waldemar Rakocy
4747 W. Rakocy, “Znaczenie Czasownika διατάσσω w Źródłach Biblijnych: W Nawiązaniu do διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων w Ga 3,19b”, The Biblical Annals 3:2 (2013), pp. 383–419.
(2013) argues that if one compares the term διατάσσω (“ordain”) in 3:19 to its use in other Greek sources, it is clear that Paul ascribes more competences to the angels than were normally assumed in Judaism. According to this verse, they did not merely play a mediating role but were themselves responsible for administering the law, as well as its shape. It was also their initiative to instruct humanity by means of the law. Jesper Tang Nielsen
4848 J.T. Nielsen, “The Cognitive Structures in Galatians 1:4”, in: B. Howe and J.B. Green (eds.), Cognitive Linguistic Explorations in Biblical Studies (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014), pp. 145–168.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110350135.145
(2014) uses cognitive theory to explain how Paul goes about combining disparate ideas in 1:4. He makes use of the well-known Hellenistic view of voluntary death but reframes it in terms of a fundamental opposition between this world and the world to come. David I. Yoon
4949 D.I. Yoon, “Discourse Analysis and the Textual Metafunction: Analyzing the Texture of Galatians 4,12–20”, Filología Neotestamentaria 27:47 (2014), pp. 83–109.
(2014) applies systemic functional linguistics to 4:12–20, showing how it helps one to determine textual meaning. Peter von der Osten-Sacken
5050 P. von der Osten-Sacken, Der Gott der Hoffnung: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Theologie des Paulus (Studien zu Kirche und Israel: Neue Folge 3, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2014), pp. 217–245.
(2014) discusses Paul’s use of μὴ γένοιτο (“not at all”) in Romans and also draws attention to the way the expression is used in Galatians (similar to its use in Romans). In 2:17, Paul uses it when rejecting a wrong interpretation of the gospel by referring to the way in which a believer’s life is changed by baptism and in 3:21, when denying that promise and law should be viewed as opposing each other. John Townsend
5151 J. Townsend, “Misunderstood New Testament Texts: Mark 2:23 and Galatians 2:1”, in: A. Avery-Peck, C.A. Evans and J. Neusner (eds.), Earliest Christianity within the Boundaries of Judaism: Essays in Honor of Bruce Chilton (The Brill Reference Library of Judaism 49, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2016), pp. 346–356.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004310339_019
(2016) thinks that διά (“after” or “during”) in 2:1 should not be translated as “after” (as scholars normally do), but as “during” or even “within”, which means that Paul visited Jerusalem at some stage during the fourteen-year period after his calling. If this is accepted, Paul’s letters have to be dated earlier. Michael H. Burer
5252 M.H. Burer, “‘Sons of Abraham’ in Galatians 3:7 as a Spiritual, Qualitative Designation”, Bibliotheca Sacra 173 (2016), pp. 337–351.
(2016) investigates expressions that are similar to “sons of Abraham” (3:7) and argues that this expression is used in Galatians as a “spiritual, qualitive designation” describing the character of those that are linked to Abraham. It thus refers to spiritual attitude. According to Donald Cobb
5353 D. Cobb, “ἐκκλείω en Galates 4,17: Exclure de l’alliance?”, Revue Biblique 123:4 (2016), pp. 567–585.
https://doi.org/10.2143/RBI.123.4.3180795
For a response to Cobb’s views, see J. Lambrecht, In Search of Meaning: Collected Notes on the New Testament (2014–2017) (Balti: Scholars’ Press, 2017), pp. 462–467.
(2016), ἐκκλείω (“exclude”) in 4:17 should be interpreted as meaning “exclude” or “shut out”. This must be understood in terms of Jewish ideas in those times about people being excluded from God’s covenant and people. Heidi Wendt
5454 H. Wendt, “Galatians 3:1 as an Allusion to Textual Prophecy”, Journal of Biblical Literature 135:2 (2016), pp. 369–389.
https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1352.2016.2968
(2016) offers a new interpretation of the term προεγράφη (“portray publicly”) that Paul uses in 3:1 to refer to his preaching in Galatia. Whereas scholars usually interpret this as meaning “proclaim” or “exhibit publicly”, Wendt believes that it refers to the prophecies about Christ that Paul found in Jewish writings. Responding to Hanna Stettler’s
5555 H. Stettler, “Did Paul Invent Justification by Faith?”, Tyndale Bulletin 66:2 (2015), pp. 161–196.
https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.29395
contribution on justification in Paul, Jan Lambrecht
5656 J. Lambrecht, In Search of Meaning: Collected Notes on the New Testament (2014–2017) (Balti: Scholars’ Press, 2017), pp. 439–442.
(2017) draws attention to several linguistic issues in 2:15-16: 2:15 has a concessive nuance; εἰδότες (“knowing”) in 2:16 refers to Paul and Peter, has a motivating nuance and is best translated in the past tense; and it is best not to put a full stop between 2:16a and b in a translation. Peter Malik
5757 P. Malik, “Some Notes on the Semantics of οἱ δοκοῦντες in Galatians 2”, The Expository Times 128:4 (2017), pp. 168–176.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014524616650572
(2017) considers the term οἱ δοκοῦντες (“those who seemed to be”, used in 2:2, 6 and 9) from the perspective of lexical semantics and the way in which it used in ancient Greek literature. From this Malik deduces that Paul uses the term in Galatians as a rhetorical device, intended to distance himself from the Jerusalem leaders, thus turning the argument of his opponents against them. According to Dieter Sänger
5858 D. Sänger, “Ἰουδαϊσμός – ἰουδαΐζειν – ἰουδαϊκῶς: Sprachliche und semantische Überlegungen im Blick auf Gal 1,13f. und 2,14”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 108:1 (2017), pp. 150–185.
https://doi.org/10.1515/znw-2017-0005
(2017), Ἰουδαϊσμός (“Judaism”) and its cognates (used in 1:13ff. and 2:14) should not be understood as only meaning “Judean” (i.e., in an ethnic-regional sense). These terms also have a religious dimension. Read from this perspective, 2:11–14 reflects a dispute in Early Christianity about what constituted Christian identity. Michael Winger
5959 M. Winger, “Paul and ἐγώ: Some Comments on Grammar and Style”, New Testament Studies 63:1 (2017), pp. 23–37.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688516000333
(2017) discusses Paul’s use of ἐγώ (“I”) and proposes that it is used for more purposes than merely indicating emphasis: distinguishing him from others, aligning him with others, constructing paradoxes, adding rhythm and using it in particular with certain verbs. Aaron Michael Jensen
6060 A.M. Jensen, “ΜΗ ΕΚΛΥΟΜΕΝΟΙ in Galatians 6:9”, Tyndale Bulletin 69:1 (2018), pp. 97–110.
(2018) argues against the scholarly consensus that μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι (“not giving up”) in 6:9 should be understood in a conditional sense. Instead, Jensen proposes that it is best understood as indicating manner, thus expressing the notion that believers should serve ceaselessly because such behaviour reflects the nature of the ceaseless eschatological harvest. After a discussion of the grammar of 5:13 and an exegetical analysis of the verse, Jan Lambrecht
6161 J. Lambrecht, In Search of Meaning III: More Notes on the New Testament (2018–2019) (Beau Bassin: Scholars’ Press, 2019), pp. 341–344.
(2019) offers the following literal translation of the verse: “For you were called to freedom, brothers; only take care that you do not make that freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another”. David I. Yoon
6262 D.I. Yoon, “The Transitivity Network and Koine Greek: The (Ideational) Meaning of Galatians 3:1–5:12”, Biblical and Ancient Greek Linguistics 8 (2019), pp. 79–110.
(2019) uses 3:1–5:12 to illustrate how systemic functional linguistics can help one to decide what a text (its “ideational meaning”, i.e., the subject matter) is about. In another study, Yoon (2019)
6363 D.I. Yoon, A Discourse Analysis of Galatians and the New Perspective on Paul (Linguistic Biblical Studies 17, Leiden: Brill, 2019).
offers a detailed discourse analysis of Galatians (also based on systemic functional linguistics) in order to determine whether the situation reflected in the letter is explained best by the New Perspective on Paul, covenantal nomism or legalism. Based on this analysis, Yoon suggests that Paul was faced by a nuanced form of legalism and not by covenantal nomism. Stephen H. Levinsohn
6464 S.H. Levinsohn, “Discourse Analysis: Galatians as a Case Study”, in: D.A. Black and B.L. Merkle (eds.), Linguistics and New Testament Greek: Key Issues in the Current Debate (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2020), pp. 83–102.
(2020) uses Galatians as a text-case for illustrating discourse analysis, in particular from the perspective of how the way in which information is presented in sentences is influenced by an author’s purpose. Levinsohn offers examples from the letter, focusing on both the macrostructure and the internal structure of a macro-unit. According to Anna Rambiert-Kwaśniewska
6565 A. Rambiert-Kwaśniewska, “Paul’s ‘Fullness of Time’ (Gal 4:4) and ‘Fullness of Times’ (Eph 1:10)”, Verbum Vitae 38:1 (2020), pp. 199–218.
https://doi.org/10.31743/vv.3739
(2020), the term “the fullness of time” (4:4) is best understood as referring to the fact that the period of the domination of the law has come to an end. Joohan Kim
6666 J. Kim, “A New Understanding of ὡς ἄγγελον Θεοῦ … ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν at Galatians 4:14”, 개혁논총 54 (2020), pp. 291–303.
(2020) proposes a different understanding of the two “as” phrases in 4:14 (“you received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus”). In order to make sense of them, the verb “received” should be repeated: “you received me as an angel of God, as you received Christ Jesus”. Several studies focus on the interpretation of ἐὰν μή (“if not”) in 2:16: Andrew A. Das
6767 A.A. Das, “Another Look at ἐὰν μή in Galatians 2:16”, Journal of Biblical Literature 119:3 (2000), pp. 529–539.
(2000) claims that the words ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (“if not through the faith of Jesus Christ”) were ambiguous. Paul’s opponents would have interpreted these words as a confirmation of their views of the importance of the law, whereas Paul would have interpreted them differently, as implying justification by faith alone. Ian W. Scott
6868 I.W. Scott, “Common Ground? The Role of Galatians 2.16 in Paul’s Argument”, New Testament Studies 53:3 (2007), pp. 425–435.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688507000215
(2007) disagrees with the view that this verse expresses common ground between Paul and his opponents. According to Scott, several features of 2:16–21, as well as the way in which Paul argues in Chapters 3–4, suggest that he expected that the view that he expressed in 2:16 would meet resistance. Debbie Hunn
6969 D. Hunn, “ἐὰν μή in Galatians 2:16: A Look at Greek Literature”, Novum Testamentum 49:3 (2007), pp. 281–290.
(2007) focuses specifically on the question of whether ἐὰν μή (“if not”) can only indicate an exception to a full statement (as J.D.G. Dunn claims) and provides proof that this is not necessarily the case. Hunn is also of the opinion that 2:16 is not ambiguous. Andrew A. Das
7070 A.A. Das, “The Ambiguous Common Ground of Galatians 2:16 Revisited”, Biblical Research 58 (2013), pp. 49–61.
(2013) responds to the criticism of Scott, Hunn and other commentators, again arguing that 2:16 is best regarded as an ambiguous common ground that was interpreted by Paul in such a way that it supported his argument.
3. Stylistic issues
The stylistic issue that received the most attention is Paul’s use of metaphor. Before giving an overview of research on this matter, research on other stylistic aspects of Galatians is discussed first:Konstantin Nikolakopoulos
7171 K. Nikolakopoulos, “Aspekte der ‘paulinischen Ironie’ am Beispiel des Galaterbriefes”, Biblische Zeitschrift 45:2 (2001), pp. 193–208.
https://doi.org/10.1163/25890468-04502003
(2001) considers rhetorical irony in Galatians by examining three instances in which irony plays an important role (1:6; 2:6 and 5:12). Nikolakopoulos also points out the effectiveness of irony for achieving Paul’s didactic-pedagogic purposes in the letter. Paul A. Holloway
7272 P.A. Holloway, “The Enthymeme as an Element of Style in Paul”, Journal of Biblical Literature 120:2 (2001), pp. 339–343.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3268298
(2001) first offers an overview of the way in which enthymemes functioned in the late Hellenistic and early Roman periods before identifying examples in some of Paul’s letters. In the case of Galatians, Holloway discusses enthymemes in 2:14, 3:3 and 4:16. Marius Reiser
7373 M. Reiser, “Paulus als Stilist”, Svensk Exegetisk Årsbok 66 (2001), pp. 151‑165.
(2001) claims that Paul’s style (e.g., in 2:1–10) was representative of his spoken language, and that, in fact, he was the first person on record to have written a Greek text as if he were speaking it (“… gesprochene Sprache eines kompetenten Sprechers mit den typischen Erscheinungen der spontanen Rede”
7474 Op. cit., p. 157.
). Marc J. Debanné
7575 M.J. Debanné, Enthymemes in the Letters of Paul (Library of New Testament Studies 303, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2006), pp. 121–166.
(2006) discusses Paul’s use of enthymemes in his letters. In the case of Galatians, Debanne points out that Paul relies to a great extent on enthymemic argumentation, in particular in the first four chapters. This was due to the seriousness of the situation in which he found himself. Terrence Callan
7676 T. Callan, “The Style of Galatians”, Biblica 88:4 (2007), pp. 496–516.
(2007) offers a detailed exposition of stylistic elements in Galatians (in terms of vocabulary and syntax) and then discusses the presence of plain, middle and grand styles in the letter. Callan believes that the letter was mostly written in the plain style, and also draws attention to the large number of metaphors in it. Yurii Alekseevich Kondrat’ev
7777 Ю.А. Kондратьев, “Риторический Прием Языковой Игры в Послании к Галатам Святого Апостола Павла”, Филологические Науки: Вопросы Теории и Практики 4:58 (2016), pp. 107–109.
(2016) examines the way in which Paul makes use of word play to enhance persuasion in Galatians. Kondrat’ev cites examples of paronomasia, alliteration, assonance and hyperbaton in the letter. In a study of “speech-in-character” in Romans 3:1–9, Justin King
7878 J. King, Speech-in-Character, Diatribe, and Romans 3:1–9: Who’s Speaking When and Why It Matters (Biblical Interpretation Series 163, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2018), pp. 70–71.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004373297
(2018) discusses two examples from Galatians: in 3:8, the way in which Paul uses speech-in-character satisfies all the conventions and comes closest to Quintilian’s views about speech-in-character; and 4:6 shows that Paul was also aware that speech-in-character may be used for non-human entities. Furthermore, King notes that Quintilian also pointed out that one may use speech-in-character for the gods. Charles E. Cruise
7979 C.E. Cruise, Writing on the Edge: Paul’s Use of Hyperbole in Galatians (Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2019).
(2019) develops a typology for detecting hyperbole which is then used to argue that the texts in Galatians that may create the impression that Paul is ambivalent about the role of the Jewish law are hyperbolic and should thus not be taken as an indication of a negative view of the law. Paul’s view of the law was quite positive.
Shinobu Yoshida
8080 S. Yoshida, “Consideration of Pronominal Shifts in the Epistle to the Galatians 3:25–26 and 4:6”, Japanese New Testament Studies 47 (2019),
(2019) focuses on Paul’s use of first and second person pronouns in 3:25–26 and 4:6. In both instances “you” refers to the recipients (as Gentile believers), but “our” in “our hearts” in 4:6 refers to both Jewish and Gentile believers.The metaphor that received the most attention is the pedagogue metaphor in 3:24–25.
3.1 Pedagogue
J.C. O’Neill
81
pp. 19–38.
(2001) discusses the references to pedagogues in 1 Corinthians 4:15 and Galatians 3:24–25 in terms of the ways in which Hellenistic and Jewish moralists used this family institution metaphorically. In 3:24, Paul uses it to depict the Jewish law as guiding Israel towards Christ and in 3:25, to portray it as imprinting God’s law on people’s hearts. According to Dieter Sänger
8281 J.C. O’Neill, “Pedagogues in the Pauline Corpus (1 Corinthians 4.15; Galatians 3.24, 25)”, Irish Biblical Studies 23:2 (2001), pp. 50–65.
(2006), the argumentative style, antithetic structure and broader context within which the pedagogue metaphor is used in Galatians makes it clear that the law is not depicted in a positive sense. It is portrayed as a “Bewahrer” (“guard”) rather than as a “Bewacher” (“guardian”). Michael J. Smith
8382 D. Sänger, “‘Das Gesetz ist unser παιδαγωγός geworden bis zu Christus’ (Gal 3,24)”, in: D. Sänger and M. Konradt (eds.), Das Gesetz im frühen Judentum und im Neuen Testament: Festschrift für Christoph Burchard zum 75. Geburtstag (Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 57, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht/Academic Press Fribourg, 2006), pp. 236–260.
(2006) discusses the cultural background of the pedagogue metaphor. According to Smith, Paul uses it in Galatians for two purposes: to highlight the temporary role of the law (that of a strict guardian) and to indicate that it prevented Israel from being contaminated by the religions of the Gentiles. Christian Laes
8483 M.J. Smith, “The Role of the Pedagogue in Galatians”, Bibliotheca Sacra 163:650 (2006), pp. 197–214.
(2009) investigates 23 Greek inscriptions mentioning pedagogues. Laes finds that they were usually slaves, that they usually stayed in contact with the children they tended to even after the children had reached adulthood, that some of these children in later life expressed their gratitude for the services rendered by the pedagogues, that pedagogues took pride in their jobs and that the term “pedagogue” eventually took on the meaning of instructor/teacher. Wilfried Eisele
8584 C. Laes, “Pedagogues in Greek Inscriptions in Hellenistic and Roman Antiquity”, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 171 (2009), pp. 113‑122.
(2012) draws attention to the development of Paul’s notion of the pedagogue in the Pauline tradition. In 3:24–25, the law is depicted as a good educator that has fulfilled its role successfully. In later developments in the Pauline tradition, grace is also depicted as an educator (in Titus 2:11–14). Furthermore, Eisele discusses the similarities and differences in the ways in which the law and grace are depicted as educators.
3.2 Slavery
John Byron
8685 W. Eisele, “Vom ‘Zuchtmeister Gesetz’ zur ‘erziehenden Gnade’ (Gal 3,24f; Tit 2,11f): Religiöse Erziehung in der Paulustradition”, Biblische Zeitschrift 56:1 (2012), pp. 65–84.
https://doi.org/10.1163/25890468-056-01-90000004
(2003) offers a thorough investigation of slavery metaphors in the Pauline Letters. In the case of Galatians, Byron notes that Paul portrays himself as a slave of God, whereas the opponents are depicted as people-pleasers. Furthermore, the Galatians are portrayed as having been in slavery before they became Christians and, by reverting to the law, as again accepting a position of slavery. Paul calls upon them to remain free, which means that they should follow “the law of Christ”, thus being slaves of Christ. Sam Tsang
8786 J. Byron, Slavery Metaphors in Early Judaism and Pauline Christianity: A Traditio-Historical and Exegetical Examination (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.162, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003), pp. 181–202.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157483-2
(2005) discusses Paul’s slavery metaphors in Galatians in the light of insights from the New Rhetoric. Tsang divides these metaphors into three categories and explains their use by means of concepts borrowed from the New Rhetoric: apologetic usage (1:1, 10, 6:17), polemical usage (2:4; 4:30) and didactic usage (3:23–26; 4:1–10). Peter Balla
8887 S. Tsang, From Slaves to Sons: A New Rhetoric Analysis on Paul’s Slave Metaphors in His Letter to the Galatians (Studies in Biblical Literature 81, New York NY: Peter Lang, 2005).
(2009) discusses Paul’s use of slavery imagery in Galatians 4 when referring to childhood of God. Balla shows that Paul uses these terms in both a literal and a figurative sense. This is also true of 4:21–31. The metaphor is first used to refer to a real person (Hagar) and then to those rejecting God’s promises. According to Daniel Bradley
8988 P. Balla, “Paul’s Use of Slavery Imagery in the Hagar Allegory”, In die Skriflig 43:1 (2009), pp. 119–134.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ids.v43i1.217
(2010), in Galatians 5, Paul combines notions from sacral manumission and servile language to create a mixed metaphor expressing two notions: that believers are totally free from the law but at the same time completely enslaved to God. Mario Kushner
9089 D. Bradley, “Freed Slaves and Enslaved Sons: Sacral Manumission Formulae and Servile Metaphors in Galatians 5”, Midwestern Journal of Theology 9:2 (2010), pp. 122–135.
(2011) highlights Paul’s use of slavery metaphors in Galatians. Three aspects are distinguished: the use of slavery metaphors to refer to the situation before salvation (i.e., slavery to Satan), the metaphorical depiction of salvation as a release from slavery, and the use of slavery metaphors to describe the limits of the post-salvation situation. Geoffrey Turner
9190 M. Kushner, “Slavery and Freedom in the Epistle to the Galatians”, Kairos: Evangelical Journal of Theology 5:2 (2011), pp. 271–289.
(2013) draws attention to the subversive way in which Paul uses slavery as a metaphor in describing Christian life. Although slavery is an oppressive experience, Paul uses it as a metaphor. In Galatians and Romans, he uses it to describe humankind’s subjection to sin but, remarkably, he also uses it to refer to a new form of slavery to God, bringing freedom to humankind.
3.3 Athletic metaphors
Uta Poplutz
9291 G. Turner, “The Christian Life as Slavery: Paul’s Subversive Metaphor”, Heythrop Journal 54:1 (2013), pp. 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2265.2010.00591.x
(2004) investigates the ways in which Paul uses athletic metaphors (“Wettkampfmetaforik”) in his letters. In the case of Galatians, Poplutz discusses 2:2 and 5:7, pointing out that Paul uses these types of metaphors to draw attention to what he wishes to emphasise, the gospel. B.J. Oropeza
9392 U. Poplutz, Athlet des Evangeliums: Eine motivgeschichtliche Studie zur Wettkampfmetaphorik bei Paulus (Herders Biblische Studien, Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2004).
(2009) thinks that Paul uses the running metaphor in 2:2, since he regarded himself as a prophetic herald like Habakkuk. This not only referred to Paul’s vocation as a missionary but also to his message, in which Habakkuk’s statement that a righteous person will live by faith played a key role. In an investigation of Paul’s use of athletic metaphors, Victor C. Pfitzner
9493 B.J. Oropeza, “Running in Vain, but Not as an Athlete (Galatians 2:2): The Impact of Habakkuk 2:2–4 on Paul’s Apostolic Commission”, in: B.J. Oropeza, C.K. Robertson and D.C. Morhmann (eds.), Jesus and Paul: Global Perspectives in Honor of James D.G. Dunn for His 70th Birthday (Library of New Testament Studies 414, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2009), pp. 139–150.
(2013) also considers examples from Galatians (2:2 and 5:7). According to Pfitzner, Paul’s agonistic metaphors were grounded both in his knowledge of athletics in his time and the philosophical tradition according to which such metaphors were used to discuss virtue. Daniel T. Durbin
9594 V.C. Pfitzner, “Was St. Paul a Sports Enthusiast? Realism and Rhetoric in Pauline Athletic Metaphors”, in: N.J. Watson and A. Parker (eds.), Sports and Christianity: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives (Routledge
(2020) explores notions of sports in Plato, Aristotle and Paul. In the case of the Pauline letters, Paul’s use of athletic imagery in 2:2 and 5:7 is discussed. According to Durbin, Paul uses two athletic proofs to frame his argument in this letter. Such a use of appeals to athletics made sense in epideictic rhetoric and would have been grasped by his audience.
3.4 Pillars
According to Nikolaus Walter
96
2013), pp. 89–111. Research in Sport, Culture and Society, New York NY/London: Routledge,
(2000), the metaphor “pillars” (used by Paul in 2:9 to refer James, Peter and John) should be interpreted against the background of the rabbinic tradition. It thus does not refer primarily to their leadership in the Jerusalem congregation, but rather to their outstanding commitment to the law (“als … hervorragende Gesetzesfromme”
9795 D.T. Durbin, “From Plato to St. Paul: Ancient Sport as Performative Public Discourse”, Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 47:3 (2020), pp. 403–418.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2020.1811108
). Craig S. Keener
9896 N. Walter, “Die ‘als Säulen Geltenden’ in Jerusalem – Leiter der Urgemeinde oder exemplarisch Fromme?”, in: M. Karrer, W. Kraus and O. Merk (eds.), Kirche und Volk Gottes: Festschrift für Jürgen Roloff zum 70. Geburtstag (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2000), pp. 275–306.
(2010) tries to determine the connotations that Paul’s audience would have associated with the metaphor “pillars” and the “right hand of fellowship” (2:9). According to Keener, “pillar” was an image for a strong and prominent figure and “the right hand of fellowship” referred to making a formal agreement that depended on the integrity and honour of both sides.
3.5 Kinship metaphors
David Rhoads
9997 Op. cit., p. 88.
(2004) draws attention to the important role that kinship language plays in Galatians. It is used by Paul to depict relationships with Abraham, among believers and with God. The issue that Paul addresses is who the true children of Abraham are. Is it those who are his physical descendants or those who live by faith? Sam Tsang
10098 C.S. Keener, “The Pillars and the Right Hand of Fellowship in Galatians 2.9”, Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism 7 (2010), pp. 51‑58.
(2007) explains the use of the Abba (“Father”) metaphor in 4:6 by means of the New Rhetoric: Paul uses the metaphor to attack his opponents by claiming that they were excluded from Jesus’ familia. Trevor J. Burke
10199 D. Rhoads, “Children of Abraham, Children of God: Metaphorical Kinship in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, Currents in Theology and Mission 31:4 (2004), pp. 282–297.
(2008) argues that Paul’s adoption metaphor (used in 4:1–7 and in Romans 8) is best understood against the context of the ancient Roman familia, thus depicting salvation as an action by the Divine Family: the Father (paterfamilias) initiates salvation, it happens through Jesus, God’s Son, and the Spirit carries out the process of resocialisation. In an investigation of fraternity language in Galatians, Jeremy Punt
102100 S. Tsang, “‘Abba’ Revisited: Merging the Horizons of History and Rhetoric through the New Rhetoric Structure for Metaphors”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 9 (2007), pp. 121–141.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v28i2.52343
(2012) shows that brotherhood language played an important role to promote solidarity and to negotiate identity in the Christian community but that it did not prevent hierarchical dissimilarity since it was also used in exercising authority and control. Peter Cimala
103101 T.J. Burke, “Adopted as Sons (ΥΙΟΘΕΣΙΑ): The Missing Piece in Pauline Soteriology”, in: S.E. Porter (ed.), Paul: Jew, Greek, and Roman (Pauline Studies 5, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2008), pp. 259–287.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004171596.i-370.76
(2015) draws attention to the variety of soteriological metaphors that Paul uses in Galatians, their coherence and the way in which they mutually interact. Cimala illustrates this in particular by means of the sonship and freedom metaphors. According to Cimala, looking for such a network of metaphors with its own inner logic is a better approach than trying to find one dominant metaphor or a centre in Paul’s theology. Erin M. Heim
104102 J. Punt, “He Is Heavy ... He Is My Brother: Unravelling Fraternity in Paul (Galatians)”, Neotestamentica 46:1 (2012), pp. 153–171.
(2017) uses contemporary metaphor theory to explain Paul’s use of the adoption metaphor in Galatians and Romans. According to Heim, in 4:5, it should be understood in terms of a Graeco-Roman background. Furthermore, it focuses on the vertical dimension of believers’ existence (the Father initiated the relationship, Christ carried out the mission and the Spirit attests to one’s adoption).
3.6 Clothing
Jung Hoon Kim
105103 P. Cimala, “Paul’s Metaphorical Soteriology: Galatians as a Test Case”, Neotestamentica 49:2 (2015), pp. 351–376.
https://doi.org/10.1353/neo.2016.0005
(2004) investigates the significance of clothing imagery in the Pauline corpus. According to Kim, in 3:27, the emphasis falls on the fact that people become children of God through faith. Thus, the metaphor is used in this instance for signifying union with the salvific Christ through faith in baptism. Martin F. Connell
106104 E.M. Heim, Adoption in Galatians and Romans: Contemporary Metaphor Theories and the Pauline huiothesia Metaphors (Biblical Interpretation Series 153, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017), pp. 148–199.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004339873
(2011) discusses the ways in which Paul refers to clothing the body of Christ in his letters. Connell suggests that the reference to clothing in 3:27 is not merely metaphorical. It might also have referred to a ritual action whereby people indicated dissociation of their values from those of the rest of the world. Audrey Taschini
107105 J.H. Kim, The Significance of Clothing Imagery in the Pauline Corpus (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 268, London/New York NY: T & T Clark International, 2004), pp. 108–133.
(2017) discusses the way in which John Donne expands the clothing metaphor (3:27) in a sermon in terms of fashion customs of his time. He did this in order to convey a spiritual message.
3.7 “The elements of the world”
Martinus C. de Boer
108106 M.F. Connell, “Clothing the Body of Christ: An Inquiry About the Letters of Paul”, Worship 85:2 (2011), pp. 128–146.
(2007) explains the expression “the elements of the world” (used in 4:3) in terms of the argumentative context in which Paul used it, as well as the cultural-historical context of the readers of the letter. De Boer views it as a metonymical reference to beliefs and ritual practices linked in Galatia to the four elements (earth, air, fire, water). Paul uses it in particular to refer to calendrical observances associated with such practices. After an overview of all the issues that are relevant for understanding Paul’s reference to “the elements of the world” (4:3, 9) and the different ways in which the term has been interpreted, Dieter T. Roth
109107 A. Taschini, “The Christian Believer’s Spiritual Clothing in John Donne’s Comment of Galatians 3,27”, Elephant & Castle 16 (2017), pp. 5–16.
(2014) opts for understanding it as referring to a worldly way of existence distinct from Christ. Neil Martin
110108 M.C. de Boer, “The Meaning of the Phrase τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου in Galatians”, New Testament Studies 53:2 (2007), pp. 204–222.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688507000124
(2018) disagrees with scholars who are of the opinion that “the elements of the world” refer to physical elements constituting the world. Martin believes that it refers to fundamental characteristics of the pre-Christian existence.
3.8 Inheritance
John K. Goodrich
111109 D.T. Roth, “What ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ Are the στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου?”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 70:1 (2014), pp. 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v70i1.2676
(2010) notes that Paul’s reference to an heir in 4:1–2 has usually been interpreted in terms of Graeco-Roman laws about guardianship, but that certain incongruities have caused some scholars to interpret it rather as an allusion to the exodus. However, Goodrich defends the traditional interpretation, arguing that Paul’s depiction of guardians and trustees makes sense in terms of Roman law. Mark Forman
112110 N. Martin, “Returning to the stoicheia tou kosmou: Enslavement to the Physical Elements in Galatians 4.3 and 9?”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 40:4 (2018), pp. 434–452.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064x18769794
(2011) offers a detailed study of the concept “inheritance” in Romans. Towards the end of the study, Forman considers the way in which the language of inheritance is used in Galatians and finds that it does not differ from that in Romans. The same emphases are found: reference to Christ’s universal Lordship as well as participation in his suffering.
3.9 Maternal images
J. Cherian
113111 J.K. Goodrich, “Guardians, Not Taskmasters: The Cultural Resonances of Paul’s Metaphor in Galatians 4.1–2”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 32:3 (2010), pp. 251–284.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X09357677
(2001) stresses the significance of the parental imagery that Paul uses in his letters, as happens in 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12 and Galatians 4:19–20. Paul’s use of this imagery shows that he is often misunderstood as opposing the participation of women in public worship. In a study of relationship metaphors in Paul’s letters, Christine Gerber
114112 M. Forman, The Politics of Inheritance in Romans (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 148, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), pp. 172–206.
https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511975141.007
(2005) draws attention to the unusual and multi-sense metaphor of childbirth that he uses in 4:19. Paul, a Jewish man, gave birth to Gentile men and women in the form of Christ for the family of God. The metaphor thus emphasises inclusivity – an important theme in the letter. Susan G. Eastman
115113 J. Cherian, “Paul: A Mother to His Churches: A Brief Examination of Parental Imagery in 1 Thess. 2:1–12 and Gal. 4:19–20”, Dharma Deepika 5:1 (2001), pp. 35–47.
(2007) focuses on the maternal images that Paul uses in particular in 4:12–5:1 – described as Paul’s “mother tongue” (a term coined by Ursula le Guin) demonstrating the “staying power” of the gospel. According to Eastman, one will only hear Paul fully if one also listens to his “mother tongue”: “… to the intensely relational inflections of his voice, the language of his maternal ‘labour’ with his converts. Paul uses the intimate imagery of family life to draw his converts back into the thread of conversation that mediates their life together”.
116114 C. Gerber, Paulus und seine “Kinder”: Studien zur Beziehungsmetaphorik der paulinischen Briefe (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 136, Berlin/New York NY: De Gruyter, 2005), pp. 437–495.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110892963
Karl Matthias Schmidt
117115 S.G. Eastman, Recovering Paul’s Mother Tongue: Language and Theology in Galatians (Grand Rapids, MI/Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans, 2007).
(2011) draws attention to the fact that the image of birth pains that Paul uses in 4:19 occurs again in 4:27 where he refers to the heavenly Jerusalem. Schmidt interprets this as follows: by repeating the birth metaphor from 4:19 in 4:21–31, this pericope is linked (via 4:19) to 1:13–2:14. In 1:13–2:14 Paul associates himself with Arabia and his opponents with Jerusalem, but in 4:21–31, this situation is changed as he now associates himself with the heavenly Jerusalem and his opponents with the earthly Jerusalem that is now linked to Arabia.
3.10 Other
David E. Fredrickson
118116 Op. cit., pp. 181–183.
(2000) detects a whole series of amatory motifs in Galatians. Fredrickson categorises these allusions as follows: the unfaithful beloved, rivalry for love, spurning and returning of love, labours of love and the effect that love has. Raymond F. Collins
119117 K.M. Schmidt, “Die Wehen des Völkerapostels: Gal 4,19 und die topographische Verankerung des Heidenapostolats innerhalb von Gal 1,13–2,14 und Gal 4,21–31”, Studien zum Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt 36 (2011), pp. 111–156.
(2008) discusses the power of the images that Paul uses. Collins groups the metaphors in Galatians under the following headings: courtroom, family language, Abraham’s story, speaking about people, Jesus’ crucifixion, Paul crucified, the two ages, baptismal imagery, hortatory use of metaphor and a metaphorical conclusion. Craig A. Evans
120118 D.E. Fredrickson, “Amatory Motifs in Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians”, Word & World 20:3 (2000), pp. 257–264.
(2008) lists over 200 parallels between Paul’s letters and non-Jewish sources. Seventeen verses/sections from Galatians are mentioned. Furthermore, Evans discusses two metaphors: pedagogue (3:24–25) and the running metaphor (2:2). Craig S. Keener (2008)
121119 R.F. Collins, The Power of Images in Paul (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2008), pp. 77–108.
disagrees with scholars who interpret 6:15 as indicating that Paul suffered from eye problems. Evidence from antiquity shows that Paul was merely using a figure of speech that the Galatians would have understood well. Japie P. Malan
122120 C.A. Evans, “Paul and the Pagans”, in: S.E. Porter (ed.), Paul: Jew, Greek, and Roman (Pauline Studies 5, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2008), pp. 117–139.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004171596.i-370.49
(2009) considers the sociohistorical context of the metaphor “being crucified with Christ” (used in Romans 6:6 and Galatians 2:19). According to Malan, it would have implied the total renunciation of everything that was important and dear to one, an irrevocable decision. Steven Muir
123121 C.S. Keener, “Three Notes on Figurative Language: Inverted Guilt in Acts 7.55-60, Paul’s Figurative Vote in Acts 26.10, Figurative Eyes in Galatians 4.15”, Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism 5 (2008), pp. 47–49.
(2014) explains Paul’s statement that Christ was publicly exhibited as crucified before the eyes of the Galatians (3:1) by referring to Roman rhetoric, street announcements, graffiti and the way in which crucifixions were conducted. All of this indicates that Paul wanted his audience to experience his preaching on Christ’s crucifixion in such a way that they would remember it.
4. Translation issues
Scholars discussed a wide variety of translation issues in Galatians:
4.1 Studies on particular verses in Galatians:
David Kuske
124122 J.P. Malan, “Die Metafoor ‘Saam met Christus Gekruisig’ in Kultuurhistoriese Verband”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 65:1 (2009), pp. 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v65i1.136
(2000) prefers to interpret the dative in 3:16 (τῷ δὲ Ἀβραάμ, “to Abraham” or “about Abraham”) as a dative of reference and suggests the following translation: “When God gave the promises he spoke about Abraham and about his descendant, He did not say ‘descendants,’ referring to many, but he referred to one person, ‘your descendant,’ who is Christ.” Timothy H. Lim
125123 S. Muir, “Vivid Imagery in Galatians 3:1: Roman Rhetoric, Street Announcing, Graffiti, and Crucifixions”, Biblical Theology Bulletin 44:2 (2014), pp. 76–86.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146107914526523
(2004) explains Paul’s statement in 3:15 that a διαθήκη (usually translated as “will”) may not be annulled or added to once it has been ratified by referring to P. Yadin 19, in which a certain Judah transfers all that he owns to his daughter – half of it immediately and the other half after his death. In the light of this example, Lim proposes that one should rather translate διαθήκη as “deed of gift”. D. Francois Tolmie
126124 D. Kuske, “Exegetical Brief: Galatians 3:16 Concerning His Seed”, Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 97:2 (2000), pp. 127–128.
(2009) considers various interpretations and the rhetorical labelling of 5:12 and classifies it as an instance of sarcasm, used to express Paul’s bitter feelings towards his opponents. Tolmie proposes the following translation for this verse: “I wish that those who upset you, would even have everything cut off!” According to Wayne Walden
127125 T.H. Lim, “The Legal Nature of Papyrus Yadin 19 and Galatians 3:15”, in: A.J. Avery-Peck, D. Harrington and J. Neusner (eds.), When Judaism and Christianity Began: Essays in Memory of Anthony J. Saldarini: Volume II:
(2010), exegetes and translators have overlooked important issues in 3:28 (the meaning of ἔνειμι [“is”] and the gender of the adjectives). Walden also believes that this verse cannot be used for formulating guidelines for gender roles in society. Peter-Ben Smit
128
(Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 85, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2004), pp. 361–376. Judaism and Christianity in the Beginning
(2015) disagrees with the usual translation of διαφέρει (“differ from” or “be superior to”) in 4:1 as “differ from”. On syntactical and semantic grounds Smit argues that it is better to translate it as “being superior to”.
4.2 Studies on particular pericopes or issues/terms in the letter as a whole
Daryl D. Schmidt
129126 D.F. Tolmie, “The Interpretation and Translation of Galatians 5:12”, Acta Theologica 29:2 (2009), pp. 86–102.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v29i2.55446
(2002) draws attention to the effect that the New Perspective on Paul has on translation issues in Romans and Galatians. Terms such as “righteousness of God”, “faith of Christ” and “works of the law” are discussed and 2:15–21 is used to illustrate this. Gregory Vall
130127 W. Walden, “Galatians 3:28: Grammar, Text, Context, and Translation”, Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood 15:1 (2010), pp. 23–26. See also earlier: W. Walden, “Galatians 3:28: Grammar Observations”, Restoration Quarterly 51:1 (2009), pp. 45–50.
(2003) examines the translation of the terms υἱός (“son”) and υἱοθεσία (“adoption”) in 3:23–4:7 in the NRSV and argues that the inaccurate translation of these terms can only be rectified if one stops trying to avoid-male orientated language in a translation. Piotr Blumczyński
131128 P.-B. Smit, “No Small Difference? Galatians 4.1 and the Translation of διαφέρει”, The Bible Translator 66:2 (2015), pp. 170–175.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2051677015590816
(2007) suggests that the way in which πνεῦμα (“spirit” or “Spirit”) in Galatians is translated in a Bible translation can be a good indication of the doctrinal profile of the particular translation. Blumczyński illustrates this by comparing the different ways in which this term is translated in some Bible translations. Zeba A. Crook
132129 D.D. Schmidt, “Paul in a New Idiom: Translation Issues in Romans and Galatians”, Forum 5:2 (2002), pp. 127–147.
(2008) offers a detailed explanation of the way in which the concept χάρις (“grace”) was used in the New Testament world and argues that it should not be translated as “grace” in 2:9, 1 Corinthians 3:10 and Romans 12:3 and 15:15. In these instances a better translation would be “benefaction” or even “favour”. D. Francois Tolmie
133130 G. Vall, “Inclusive Language and the Equal Dignity of Women and Men in Christ”, The Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly Review 67:4 (2003), pp. 579–606.
https://doi.org/10.1353/tho.2003.0002
(2009) offers a survey of the most important translation problems that translators have to deal with in Galatians. They are classified in two categories: translation problems arising from the source text, and those pertaining to the target language/culture (in this instance, English). Timothy Ashworth
134131 P. Blumczyński, “πνεῦμα in Galatians: A Touchstone of Doctrinal Orthodoxy”, Anglica Wratislaviensia 45 (2007), pp. 89–105.
(2010) proposes that στοιχέω (5:25 and 6:16) and στοιχεῖα (4:3, 9), usually translated as “walk” and “elemental spirits” or “principles” respectively, should rather be translated as “keeping aligned with” (in the sense of “keeping aligned in the footsteps of”) and “things that keep aligned behaviour/give directions for behaviour”. Sarah Buchanan
135132 Z.A. Crook, “Grace as Benefaction in Galatians 2:9, 1 Corinthians 3:10, and Romans 12:3; 15:15”, in: D. Neufeld (ed.), The Social Sciences and Biblical Translation (Symposium Series 41, Atlanta GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008), pp. 25–38.
(2014) investigates the way in which concepts such as “freedom” and “slavery” are translated in 16 Bible translations (German, French, Spanish and English). Buchanan concludes that the choices that translators make are quite often not purely linguistic choices. They are frequently influenced by ideological and theological choices. In order to help translators in their choices about gender-inclusive language, Dan Nässelqvist
136133 D.F. Tolmie, “Translation Problems in the Letter to the Galatians”, Acta Patristica et Byzantina 20 (2009), pp. 161–177.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10226486.2009.11879102
(2016) distinguishes between three types of gender-inclusive language (gender-accurate, gender-muted and radically inclusive language). Some of the examples come from Galatians: 1:3–5, 14 and 3:5.
Varghese P. Chiraparamban
137134 T. Ashworth, “Spirit-Led Freedom: Examining a Significant Detail in Galatians”, Scripture Bulletin (Online) 40:2 (2010), pp. 75–87.
(2015) points out that πίστις (pistis) is usually translated as “faith” when it occurs in the Pauline letters, but that this is not a good translation. πίστις usually indicates relation and therefore it should rather be translated as “trust”. Michael J. Gorman
138135 S. Buchanan, “Translating Freedom between Cultures and Ideologies: A Comparative Analysis of the Translation of Keywords in Galatians”, in: J. Romero-Trillo (ed.), Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics 2014: New Empirical and Theoretical Paradigms (Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics 2, Cham/Heidelberg/New York NY: Springer International Publishing, 2014), pp. 149–178.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06007-1_8
(2017) offers a theological interpretation of 2:15–21 and concludes it with an alternative translation of these verses. Jan Lambrecht
139136 D. Nässelqvist, “Könsinkluderande Språk i Nästa Svenska Bibelöversättning”, Svensk Exegetisk Årsbok 81 (2016), pp. 169–216.
(2018) discusses Paul’s reasoning in 3:15–18 and critically evaluates the translation of the pericope in the New Revised Standard Version and the New English Bible. Péter B. Furkó
140137 V.P. Chiraparamban, “The Translation of πίστις and Its Cognates in the Pauline Epistles”, The Bible Translator 66:2 (2015), pp. 176–189.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2051677015590817
(2020) highlights the importance of discourse markers in various genres and languages. One of the issues that Furkó identifies to illustrate this is the way in which discourse markers are used in Bible translations. Furkó specifically focuses on Greek conjunctions in the Gospel of John and Galatians (in the Textus Receptus) and the translation equivalents (or, in some instances, omissions) that have been used for them in various translations.
4.3 Specific Bible translations/target languages
Pratrap Chandre Gine
141138 M.J. Gorman, “Reading Gal 2:15–21 Theologically: Beyond Old and New, Beyond West and East”, in: A. Despotis (ed.), Participation, Justification, and Conversion: Eastern Orthodox Interpretation of Paul and the Debate between “Old and New Perspectives on Paul” (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.442, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), pp. 321–354.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155453-7
Adapted version: M.J. Gorman, Participating in Christ: Explorations in Paul’s Theology and Spirituality (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2019), pp. 115–149.
(2001) draws attention to the parallels between Paul’s and Philo’s views of the law and is of the opinion that Galatians is best understood in terms of the multi-ethnic setup so characteristic of the Graeco-Roman world. Gine also works out the implications of such a view for translating and interpreting Galatians in Bengali. Thomas Söding
142139 J. Lambrecht, In Search of Meaning II: Another Year of Reflection on the New Testament (2017–2018) (Beau Bassin: Scholars’ Press, 2018), 313‑319.
(2007) discusses the translation of the Hagar-Sarah allegory (4:21–31) in the Einheitsübersetzung critically. Söding identifies several translation errors and points out the effect of these errors. Readers will not realise that this text expresses covenant theology. Söding also offers an alternative translation of vv. 22–26.Alain Gignac
143140 P.B. Furkó, Discourse Markers and Beyond: Descriptive and Critical Perspectives on Discourse-Pragmatic Devices across Genres and Languages (Postdisciplinary Studies in Discourse, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020), pp. 219–245.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37763-2_9
(2009) draws attention to a translation project (Bible, nouvelle traduction) where the translation was done by two people – a Biblical exegete (Gignac) and a secular author (Marie Depussé). Gignac offers examples of the outcome of such an approach from Galatians. For example, “faith” was translated as “adherence” and “glory” by “splendour”. Jonathan E.T. Kuworno-Adjaottor
144141 P.C. Gine, Nomos in Context: Philo, Galatians and the Bengali Bible (Delhi: ISPCK, 2001).
(2012) investigates the way in which the phrase παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν (“was our pedagogue towards/until Christ”) in 3:24 is rendered in Dangme translations of the Bible. Kuworno-Adjaottor shows that the full meaning of the phrase is not conveyed and that this may cause antinomianism amongst readers. Better ways of translating the phrase into Dangme are also suggested. Piotr Baran
145142 T. Söding, “‘Sie ist unsre Mutter’: Die Allegorie über Sara und Hagar (Gal 4,21–31) in der Einheitsübersetzung und bei Paulus”, in: C. Dohmen and F.-L. Hossfeld (eds.), Für immer verbündet: Studien zur Bundestheologie der Bibel: Festgabe für Frank-Lothar Hossfeld zum 65. Geburtstag (Stuttgarter Bibelstudien 211, Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2007), pp. 231–237.
(2012) proposes a methodology whereby Bible translations from the sixteenth century may be analysed. This methodology, based on insights from rhetorical criticism and translation studies, is illustrated by considering a part of Galatians 3 from the Brest Bible. Daniel R. Schwartz
146143 A. Gignac, “A Translation That Induces a Reading Experience: Narrativity, Intratextuality, Rhetorical Performance, and Galatians 1–2”, in: S.E. Porter and M.J. Boda (eds.), Translating the New Testament: Text, Translation, Theology (McMaster New Testament Studies, Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2009), pp. 146–166.
(2013) argues that the way in which 1:13–14, 2 Maccabees 8:1 and Romans 10:5 are translated in the Einheitsübersetzung wrongly creates the impression that Jewish observance of the law is only about practice and does not have any religious significance. Ernst R. Wendland
147144 J.E.T. Kuwornu-Adjaottor, “The Law as Our Disciplinarian: A Critical Study of Galatians 3:24 in the Dangme Translations of the Bible”, European Scientific Journal 8:24 (2012), pp. 53–64.
(2014) offers a rhetorical analysis of 3:1–14 (focused on oral-aural qualities) which is used as a basis for evaluating the passage in two Chewa Bible translations (1922 and 1988). Wendland also makes suggestions as to how mother-tongue speakers can be helped to overcome some of the conceptual challenges in the text. Richard K. Moore
148145 P. Baran, “Przekład Listu do Galatów w Biblii Brzeskiej Jako Element Retorycznej Inventio”, Miedzy Oryginalem a Przekladem 18:2 (2012), pp. 119–134.
(2014) criticises the way in which N.T. Wright handled the doctrine of justification in Galatians and Romans in his translation of the New Testament (The New Testament for Everyone). According to Moore, Wright’s translation of δικαιοσύνη (“justification” or “righteousness”) and its cognates does not agree with what Paul wrote. N.T. Wright
149146 D.R. Schwartz, “Paul, the Jews, and Well-Meaning Translation: At What Price ‘Einheit’?”, Theologische Zeitschrift 69:4 (2013), pp. 372–384.
https://doi.org/10.5169/seals-877672
(2014) responds to Moore’s critique on the same issue. George Kam Wah Mak
150147 E.R. Wendland, “The Linguistic, Conceptual, and Pragmatic Challenges of Communicating Galatians 3:1–14 in Chewa”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 19 (2014), pp. 58–80.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2S.4
(2017) discusses the way in which Protestant Bible translation, especially the Mandarin Union Version (1919), influenced the development of Mandarin so that what originally was a lingua franca eventually became the national language of China. Manuel Santos Noya
151148 R.K. Moore, “N.T. Wright’s Treatment of ‘Justification’ in The New Testament for Everyone”, Expository Times 125:10 (2014), pp. 483–486.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014524614532208
See also the later article with a broader scope: R.K. Moore, “An Unresolved Dilemma in English Bible Translation: How to English Paul’s Use of the δικαι-Family”, The Bible Translator 71:1 (2020), pp. 120–136.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2051677019899455
(2017) points out that Luther did not follow the Greek text slavishly in his translation, since he believed that he had to convey the theological rather than the literal meaning. Most of the differences in Luther’s translation can be classified as stylistic divergences. In some cases, however, Luther modified the meaning of texts. One such example comes from Galatians (5:5–6). Eran Shuali
152149 N.T. Wright, “Translating δικαιοσύνη: A Response”, The Expository Times 125:10 (2014), pp. 487–490.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014524614534566
(2018) discusses the first Hebrew translation of Paul’s letters, György Thúri’s translation of Galatians and Ephesians, published in 1598 in Wittenberg. Shuali points out that this translation illustrates the important role that Hebrew learning played in the Humanist mind-set in the sixteenth century. Chin Ook Kim
153150 G.K.W. Mak, Protestant Bible Translation and Mandarin as the National Language of China (Sinica Leidensia 131, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017).
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004316300
(2020) investigates the Korean translation of 2:14b–15 critically, compares it with other translations (Latin, English and German), and suggests a better way to translate it in order to solve the problems in the current translation.
4.4 New Bible translations
Arthur J. Dewey, Roy W. Hoover, Lane C. McGaughy and Daryl D. Schmidt
154151 M. Santos Noya, “The Theological Significance of Luther’s Modifications to the Greek and Latin Texts of the Pauline Letters”, Concilium 2017:2
(2010) offer a new translation of Paul’s authentic letters – a translation attempting to restore Paul’s original voice without the disturbances caused by later theological developments. J. Edward Walters and George A. Kiraz
155
(2017), pp. 47–55.
(2013) published an English translation of the Syriac Peshitta of Galatians to Philemon. Kiraz prepared the Syriac text and Walters translated it. Timothy W. Seid
156152 E. Shuali, “György Thúri and His Hebrew Translation of Paul’s Epistles to the Galatians and the Ephesians: Hebrew among the Classical Languages in the Sixteenth Century”, Semitica et Classica 11 (2018), pp. 167–174.
https://doi.org/10.1484/j.sec.5.116799
(2019), who is an adherent of the Radical New Perspective on Paul, offers an interpretation and new translation of 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, Philippians, Philemon and Romans. Seid also identifies key terms in these letters providing their traditional translation, as well as a motivation for the translation offered in this volume. 153 C.O. Kim, “A Reconsideration of the Korean Translation of Galatians 2:14b–15”, 대학과 선교 46 (2020), pp. 289–314. 154 A.J. Dewey, R.W. Hoover, L.C. McGaughy and D.D. Schmidt, The Authentic Letters of Paul: A New Reading of Paul’s Rhetoric and Meaning (Salem OR: Polebridge, 2010).155 J.E. Walters and G.A. Kiraz, The Syriac Peshitta Bible with English Translation: Galatians – Philemon (Piscataway NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013). 156 T.W. Seid, Rewriting Paul: Original Translations of the Letters of Paul (1 Thessalonians, Galatians, Philippians, Philemon, and Romans) (s.l.: APeX Life Media, 2019). Chapter 3:
The Wirkungsgeschichte of the LetterA diversity of themes was investigated by scholars. As will become clear from the overview, the person whose interpretation of Galatians attracted the most attention from scholars is Martin Luther (by far!), followed by Jerome, Chrysostom, Augustine, Aquinas and, perhaps surprisingly, Martin Heidegger.
1. The Early Church
1.1 General
Lucas F. Mateo-Seco
11 L.F. Mateo-Seco, “‘Envió Dios a su Hijo, Nacido de Mujer’ (Gálatas 4,4–5 en el Pensamiento Patrístico Anterior al Concilio de Éfeso)”, Scripta Theologica 32:1 (2000), pp. 13–46.
(2000) gives an overview of the way in which 4:4‑5 was interpreted by the Church Fathers before the Council of Ephesus, culminating in the exegesis of Augustine whose interpretation, in spite of its brevity, integrated most of what had been highlighted in the Latin exegesis before him. Taking 3:28 as point of departure, Heike Omerzu
22 H. Omerzu, “‘Es gibt nicht mehr männlich und weiblich’: Zur Bedeutung von Frauen im frühen Christentum”, in: S. Schmitt (ed.), Frauen und Kirche (Mainzer Vorträge, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 2002), pp. 153–183.
(2002) argues that the notion that a decline can be detected from a liberating view of women in the Jesus movement to Paul’s chauvinism, with an even further downward trend to an animosity towards women in the third generation of Christianity, is an oversimplification, since the views on women were much more ambivalent during this period. The Ancient Christian Commentary Series (2005), edited by Mark J. Edwards,
33 M.J. Edwards (ed.), Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: New Testament 8, Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005, 2nd edition), pp. 1–100.
offers easy access to the way in which Galatians was interpreted in the Early Church by means of extracts from the works of Jerome, Origen, Augustine, Chrysostom, Ambrosiaster, Theodoret of Cyrus, Marius Victorinus and Theodore of Mopsuestia. Kari Kloos
44 K. Kloos, “‘In Christ There Is Neither Male nor Female’: Patristic Interpretation of Galatians 3:28”, Studia Patristica 39 (2006), pp. 239‑244.
(2006) identifies three main thrusts in Patristic interpretations of 3:28: an ascetic thrust, i.e., interpretations renouncing marriage (e.g., Jerome and Athanasius), a unitive thrust, i.e., readings emphasising the spiritual unity of all believers (e.g., Augustine), and a theological thrust, i.e., interpretations focusing on what the verse reveals about God’s identity (e.g., Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory of Nazianzus). Martin Meiser
55 M. Meiser, “Vom Nutzen der patristischen Exegese für die neuzeitliche Schriftauslegung (am Beispiel des Galaterbriefes)”, in: D.C. Bienert, J. Jeska and T. Witulski (eds.), Paulus und die antike Welt: Beiträge zur zeit- und religionsgeschichtlichen Erforschung des paulinischen Christentums: Festgabe für Dietrich-Alex Koch zum 65. Geburtstag (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 222, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008), pp. 189–209.
(2008) illustrates the usefulness of Patristic exegesis for our current interpretation of the New Testament by means of examples from Galatians. In particular, Meiser highlights the following aspects that may be of help to us: the Church Fathers’ competence in Greek, as well as their philological, cultural, exegetical and theological competence. Pauline Nigh Hogan
66 P.N. Hogan, No Longer Male and Female: Interpreting Galatians 3:28 in Early Christianity (Library of New Testament Studies 380, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2008).
(2008) offers a detailed study of the interpretation of 3:28 in the first four centuries of Christianity, showing that almost all commentators understood it as referring to Christian perfection but that this notion was interpreted in different ways, depending on the interest of the particular commentator who cited it. Lucien Legrand
77 L. Legrand, “Paul’s Theology in the Context of Early Christian Pluralism”, Jnanadeepa 12:1/2 (2009), pp. 52–65.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4268514
(2009) discusses the way in which the sensus fidelium developed with regard to the Antioch incident under people such as Clement and Ignatius of Antioch and an orthodoxy was created according to which Paul and Peter served as two focal points. Bruce W. Longenecker
88 B.W. Longenecker, “The Poor of Galatians 2:10: The Interpretative Paradigm of the First Centuries”, in: B.W. Longenecker and K.D. Liebengood (eds.), Engaging Economics: New Testament Scenarios and Early Christian Reception (New Testament Scenarios and Early Christian Reception, Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2009), pp. 205–221.
(2009) offers an overview of the way in which “the poor” mentioned in 2:10 was interpreted until around 450 CE. Longenecker shows that, in contrast to current interpretation of the term, with the exception of John Chrysostom, none of the early interpreters restricted the reference of the term to believers in Jerusalem. Johan Leemans
99 J. Leemans, “Die Paulusrezeption in der Alten Kirche”, Theologie der Gegenwart 52:1 (2009), pp. 42–54.
(2009) discusses several examples of the Patristic interpretation of Pauline texts. In the case of 3:28, Leemans emphasises the diversity of interpretations: the verse has been interpreted eschatologically, ethically, ascetically, protologically, as an indication of how life in monasteries should be organised, and even in a Christological/Trinitarian sense. In another study, Leemans
1010 J. Leemans, “After Philo and Paul: Hagar in the Writings of the Church Fathers”, in: M. Goodman, G.H. van Kooten and J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten (eds.), Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham (Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions 13, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2010), pp. 435–447.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004188433.i-578.144
(2010) identifies and illustrates three tendencies in the way in which the Church Fathers interpreted Hagar: some of them followed a line of interpretation pursued by Philo, others discussed the acceptability of Paul’s typological reading of the Hagar/Sarah events, and still others interpreted Hagar and Sarah as representing opposite options in religion (with Hagar normally representing a less attractive option). Gesila Nneka Uzukwu
1111 G.N. Uzukwu, “The Church Fathers’ Interpretations and Modern Exegesis of Gal 3,28c: A Comparative Analysis”, Annali di Storia dell’Esegesi 27:2 (2010), pp. 109–131.
(2010) explains how the Church Fathers interpreted 3:28c, showing that current interpretation does not really differ from the way in which they interpreted the phrase. Uzukwu distinguishes between four approaches: interpretations linking it to baptism, human sexuality, creation or equality in Christ. Silke Petersen
1212 S. Petersen, “Nicht mehr ‘männlich und weiblich’ (Gen 1,27): Die Rede von der Aufhebung der Geschlechterdifferenz im frühen Christentum”, in: I. Fischer and C. Heil (eds.), Geschlechterverhältnisse und Macht: Lebensformen in der Zeit des frühen Christentums (Exegese in unserer Zeit 21, Münster: LIT Verlag, 2010), pp. 78–109.
(2010) investigates the discussions on the abolition of gender differences in Early Christianity. According to Petersen, the inherent potential of 3:28 in terms of the criticism of hierarchies (as is evident from some early interpretations of the verse) could never come into its own because the interpretation of the verse came to be dominated by ontological issues instead of social issues.
Javier Ibañez
1313 J. Ibañez, “La ‘Mujer’ de Gal. 4,4 en la Patrística Griega de los Siglos I y II”, Estudios Marianos 76 (2010), pp. 305–318.
(2010) provides a thorough overview of the interpretation of the term “mother” in 4:4 in Greek Patristic writings in the first and second centuries CE and also discusses the implications of the insights gained in this way. Pierre-Marie Hombert
1414 P.-M. Hombert, “‘Le Christ s’est fait pour nous malédiction’: L’éxégèse patristique de Galates 3,13”, in: I. Bochet and M. Fedou (eds.), L’exégèse patristique de l’Épître aux Galates (Collection des Études Augustiniennes: Série Antiquité 197, Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, 2014), pp. 181–248.
(2014) gives an overview of the Patristic exegesis of 3:13. Hombert identifies several tendencies, such as positive readings of the text (emphasising the cross as blessing), moral and penal readings, as well as an “ontological reading” (by Augustine: Christ assumed death as the punishment of sin).
1.2 Justin Martyr
Franco Manzi
1515 F. Manzi, “L’annullamento della Maledizione di Dt. 21,23 in Galati nel Dialogo con Trifone”, Augustinianum 42:1 (2002), pp. 5–34.
(2002) discusses the way in which the annulment of the curse in Deuteronomy 21:23 in Galatians 3:13–14 was handled by Justin Martyr in his Dialogue of Trypho. Carlos A. Segovia
1616 C.A. Segovia, “Discussing/Subverting Paul: Polemical Rereadings and Competing Supersessionist Misreadings of Pauline Inclusivism in Late Antiquity: A Case Study on the Apocalypse of Abraham, Justin Martyr, and the Qur’an”, in: G. Boccaccini and C.A. Segovia (eds.), Paul the Jew: Rereading the Apostle as a Figure of Second Temple Judaism (Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press, 2016), pp. 341–361.
(2016) outlines how the argument on Abraham, that Paul used to prove his claim that the Gentiles were included in the people of God (as found in Romans 4 and Galatians 3), was polemically reworked in Christian and Muslim texts. One of the examples that Segovia discusses, is Justin Martyr. Benjamin L. White
1717 B.L. White, “Justin between Paul and the Heretics: The Salvation of Christian Judaizers in the Dialogue with Trypho”, Journal of Early Christian Studies 26:2 (2018), pp. 163–189.
https://doi.org/10.1353/earl.2018.0017
(2018) points out that Justin Martyr concedes in his Dialogue with Trypho 47 that Gentile Christians who become Christ-believing Jews will be saved. Although this chapter contains many allusions to Galatians and Romans 14–15, Justin thus disagrees with Paul on this issue. According to White, this might have been caused by the fact that Justin had to negotiate a very complex rhetorical situation and had several different audiences in mind.
1.3 Marius Victorinus
Stephen A. Cooper
1818 S.A. Cooper, “Narratio and exhortatio in Galatians According to Marius Victorinus Rhetor”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 91:1 (2000), pp. 107–135.
https://doi.org/10.1515/zntw.2000.91.1-2.107
(2000) draws attention to the way in which Marius Victorinus approached Galatians: he identified rhetorical figures and argumentative conventions that Paul used in Galatians but never identified or classified the letter as a speech. Cooper
1919 S.A. Cooper (transl.), Marius Victorinus’ Commentary on Galatians: Introduction, Translation, and Notes (Oxford Early Christian Studies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).
https://doi.org/10.1093/0198270275.001.0001
(2005) also published the first English translation of Marius Victorinus’ commentary on Galatians. Cooper’s work contains a lengthy introduction, amongst other things situating the commentary in its original context and pointing out the influence it had on later Latin exegetes.
1.4 Ambrosiaster
Gerald L. Bray
2020 G.L. Bray (transl. & ed.), Commentaries on Galatians – Philemon: Ambrosiaster (Ancient Christian Texts, Downers Grove IL: IVP Academic, 2009).
(2009) published the first English translation of the complete set of Latin commentaries on Paul by Ambrosiaster, an anonymous author from the fourth century CE. Martine Dulaey
2121 M. Dulaey, “Expliquer Paul dans la Rome de Damase: Le commentaire de l’Ambrosiaster sur l’Épître aux Galates”, in: I. Bochet and M. Fédou (eds.), L’exégèse patristique de l’Épître aux Galates (Collection des Études Augustiniennes: Série Antiquité 197, Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, 2014), pp. 83–124.
(2014) offers a detailed description of Ambrosiaster’s commentary on Galatians: the exegetical method that he followed (a literal and a precise approach), that he worked like a historian, how he viewed the message of the letter (the value and limitations of the law, understanding Paul’s struggle), notable exegetical points, and the way in which he confirmed and defended orthodoxy against various groupings (the Manicheans, the Jews and dissident Christians and heretics).
1.5 John Chrysostom
Margaret M. Mitchell
2222 M.M. Mitchell, “Reading Rhetoric with Patristic Exegetes”, in: A.Y. Collins and M.M. Mitchell (eds.), Antiquity and Humanity: Essays on Ancient Religion and Philosophy Presented to Hans Dieter Betz on His 70th Birthday (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), pp. 333–355.
(2001) explains how one should go about using Patristic exegetes when one reads New Testament text rhetorically. Mitchell discusses John Chrysostom’s exegesis of Galatians as an example as to how this should be done. According to Mitchell, Chrysostom regarded Galatians as an aggressive and apologetic letter: such a view comes very close to Betz’s appraisal of the letter. For Lauri Thurén
2323 L. Thurén, “John Chrysostom as a Rhetorical Critic: The Hermeneutics of an Early Father”, Biblical Interpretation 9:2 (2001), pp. 180–218.
(2001), Chrysostom’s rhetorical and theological interpretation of Galatians can serve as a critical corrective to current interpretations of the letter, since he had a very good training in rhetoric. Thurén also points out that Chrysostom offered a text-based reading of the letter and determined the theology of the letter by trying to understand the devices and tactics that Paul used. Malcolm Heath
24
https://doi.org/10.1163/156851501300139291
(2004) highlights the influence of contemporary rhetoric on Chrysostom’s exegesis of Galatians. Heath thinks that current attempts to classify Galatians in terms of the three classes of oratory are misguided. Furthermore, Heath illustrates the way in which Chrysostom used rhetorical concepts such as counter-position in his interpretation of the letter. Jacques de Penthos
2524 M. Heath, “John Chrysostom, Rhetoric and Galatians”, Biblical Interpretation 12:4 (2004), pp. 369–400.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ 1568515042418578
(2009) published a French translation of Chrysostom’s homilies on Galatians, Philippians, Colossians and I & II Thessalonians. This is an abridged version with some parts (such as summaries and digressions) excluded. Margaret M. Mitchell
2625 J. de Pentos (transl. & ed.), Saint Jean Chrysostome: Homélies sur les épîtres de saint Paul: III. Lettre aux Galates, lettre aux Philippiens, lettre aux Colossiens, lettres aux Thessaloniciens: Édition abrégée, établie et présentée par Jacques de Penthos (Paris: Guibert, 2009).
(2012) draws attention to the way in which Chrysostom treated the Antioch incident in a homily that has not been translated yet (hom. in Gal 2.11). In this homily, Chrysostom interpreted the incident as “a counter-movement against hypocrisy”.
2726 M.M. Mitchell, “Peter’s ‘Hypocrisy’ and Paul’s: Two ‘Hypocrites’ at the Foundation of Earliest Christianity”, New Testament Studies 58:2 (2012), pp. 213–234.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S002868851100035X
Catherine Broc-Schmezer
2827 Op. cit., p. 233.
(2014) highlights Chrysostom’s interpretation of 3:28: he does not pay much attention to the first pair (Jew/Greek) but rather emphasises the other two pairs (slave/free and male/female) in order to underline the equality between rich and poor and males and females in his time. Chris L. de Wet
2928 C. Broc-Schmezer, “‘Il n’y a ni Juif, ni Grec; ni esclave, ni homme libre, il n’y a pas l’homme et la femme.’: Galates 3,28 chez Jean Chrysostome: Questions d’anthropologie”, in: I. Bochet and M. Fédou (eds.), L’exégèse patristique de l’Épître aux Galates (Collection des Études Augustiniennes: Série Antiquité 197, Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, 2014), pp. 13–32.
(2014) explains the dynamics between identity-formation and alterity in Chrysostom’s homilies on Galatians. According to De Wet, for Chrysostom identity formation formed part of Paulinomorphism: to become like Christ one had to become like Paul. De Wet also investigates how Chrysostom applied this notion to alterity. In another contribution, De Wet
3029 C.L. de Wet, “Identity-Formation and Alterity in John Chrysostom’s in Epistulam ad Galatas commentarius”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 19
(2015) offers a detailed study of “doulology” (i.e., the academic study of the discourse on slavery – a term created by De Wet) in Chrysostom’s homilies. De Wet shows that the metaphorical and theological construction of human bondage had a great influence on Chrysostom’s theology, ethics and the way in which he interpreted the Bible, which in turn had an enormous effect on the existence of slaves. Susan B. Griffith
31
(2014), pp. 18–41.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2S.2
(2017) compares two interpretations of 2:11–14 by John Chrysostom: one in his well-known commentary on the letter and the other in a lesser known homily (In illud: In faciem ei restiti). Sotirios Despotis
3230 C.L. de Wet, Preaching Bondage: John Chrysostom and the Discourse of Slavery in Early Christianity (Oakland CA: University of California Press, 2015).
https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520286214.001.0001
(2017) offers an Eastern-Orthodox reading of 3:6–9 and 23–29 based on the interpretation of John Chrysostom. Despotis shows that Chrysostom’s interpretation had a solid exegetical basis. Guillaume Bady
3331 S.B. Griffith, “Apostolic Authority and the ‘Incident at Antioch’: Chrysostom on Gal. 2:11–4”, Studia Patristica 96 (2017), pp. 117–126.
(2018) draws attention to the nature of Chrysostom’s exegetical works on Galatians and Daniel. According to Bady, the term ὑπόμνημα (“reminder”) seems like a good way to describe the way in which they were originally composed since one also has to ask whether they consisted merely of notes or whether they were revised by Chrysostom before publication. According to Edith M. Humphrey
3432 S. Despotis, “Eine östlich-orthodoxe Lektüre von Gal. 3,6–9.23–29”, in: A. Despotis (ed.), Participation, Justification, and Conversion: Eastern Orthodox Interpretation of Paul and the Debate between “Old and New Perspectives on Paul” (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.442, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), pp. 179–200.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155453-7
(2018), it is clear from Chrysostom’s exegesis of Galatians that he had a narrow interpretation of the concept “works of the law” but interpreted the concept “righteousness of God” in a flexible way. Luther, on the other hand, had a very specific interpretation of “righteousness of God” but a broad view of “works of the law”. Elena Ene Draghici-Vasilescu
3533 G. Bady, “Genres et factures des textes exégétiques attribués à Jean Chrysostome”, in: C. Delattre, E. Valette, J.-F. Cottier, S. Kefallonitis, M. Ribreau and J. Soler (eds.), Pragmatique du commentaire: Mondes anciens, mondes lointains (Antiquité et Sciences Humaines 4, Turnhout: Brepols, 2018), pp. 265–289.
https://doi.org/10.1484/J.ASH.5.114321
(2019) draws attention to the reception of Pauline theology in Galatians in the Liturgy of Chrysostom. According to Draghici-Vasiliscu, it is best to regard Galatians as a letter of freedom rather than a letter of warning.
1.6 Jerome
Jeannine Siat
3634 E.M. Humphrey, “Meditating Upon God’s Righteousness with Chrysostom (and Luther)”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 29–43. In his response to Humphrey’s contribution (in the same volume), Peter
(2008) offers a fresh analysis of the controversy between Augustine and Jerome after the publication of Jerome’s commentary on Galatians, in particular of the way in which Augustine, in his commentary, rejected Jerome’s explanation of the conflict between Paul and Peter at Antioch. According to Jerome, it was only a feigned conflict whereas Augustine viewed it as a conflict in the real sense of the word. Siat points out that Augustine’s rejection of Jerome’s interpretation actually caused “a new incident from Antioch”. Giacomo Raspanti
37
might perhaps not be so different from that of Chrysostom as Humphrey believes. See P.J. Leithart, “Response: Galatians Five Hundred Years Later”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 63–71. J. Leithart suggests that Luther’s interpretation of the two concepts
(2009) discusses the reason why Jerome wrote his commentary on Galatians, its literary and historical contexts as well as its significance. Thomas P. Scheck
3835 E.E. Draghici-Vasilescu, “The ‘Gospel of Freedom’ or a Letter of Warning? The Use of Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians in the Byzantine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom”, Akropolis: Journal of Hellenic Studies 3 (2019), pp. 111–130.
https://doi.org/10.35296/jhs.v3i0.31
(2010) published the first English translation of Jerome’s commentary on Galatians (as well as on Titus and Philemon). Pauline Renoux-Caron
3936 J. Siat, “Pierre et Paul dans l’Épître aux Galates: La controverse Jérôme – Augustin”, in: G. Nauroy and M.A. Vannier (eds.), Saint Augustin et la Bible: Actes du colloque de l’université Paul Verlaine-Metz (7–8 Avril 2005) (Bern: Peter Lang, 2008), pp. 259–273.
(2011) discusses José de Sigüenza’s interpretation of the conflict between Jerome and Augustine on the interpretation of 2:11–14 in his book on Jerome (1595). De Sigüenza tried to reconcile the viewpoints of the two for apologetic purposes, namely, to show accord between the doctors and the fathers of the Early Church. Andrew Cain
4037 G. Raspanti, “The Significance of Jerome’s Commentary on Galatians in His Exegetical Production”, in: A. Cain and J. Lössl (eds.), Jerome of Stridon: His Life, Writings and Legacy (London/New York NY: Routledge, 2009), 163–171.
(2011) focuses on tradition and innovation in Jerome’s commentary on Galatians. Cain shows that Jerome used his four Pauline commentaries to reassert his spiritual authority in Rome after he had moved to Bethlehem. Cain also argues that it is wrong to characterise Jerome’s commentaries as mere paraphrases of Origen’s commentaries. Jason A. Myers
4138 T.P. Scheck (transl.), St. Jerome’s Commentaries on Galatians, Titus, and Philemon (Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2010).
(2013) discusses the dispute between Jerome and Augustine on the interpretation of the Antioch incident in order to show that there was at least one person in the Early Church that had a positive interpretation of Paul’s view of the law (and thus similar to the view of the New Perspective): Augustine emphasised the divine origin of the law and pointed out that Paul’s critique of the law should be understood within the context of a Gentile audience. Michel Fédou
4239 P. Renoux-Caron, “Resonancias Hispánicas de las Discrepancias entre San Agustín y San Jerónimo en la Vida de San Jerónimo (1595) de Fray
(2014) describes Origen’s influence on Jerome’s commentary. Examples such as the Antioch incident and the Sarah-Hagar allegory are discussed. H.A.G. Houghton
43
Criticón 111–112 (2011), pp. 121–136. José de Sigüenza”,
https://doi.org/10.4000/criticon.2543
(2014) analyses the Biblical text of Jerome’s commentary on Galatians and compares it with other textual readings, thereby showing the complex ways in which the Biblical text was transmitted in this commentary. Houghton also points out that the significance of non-Vulgate variants in Jerome’s commentary has been underestimated by scholars. Wei Hua
4440 A. Cain, “Jerome’s Pauline Commentaries between East and West: Tradition and Innovation in the Commentary on Galatians”, in: J. Lössl and J.W. Watt (eds.), Interpreting the Bible and Aristotle in Late Antiquity: The Alexandrian Commentary Tradition between Rome and Baghdad (Farnham/Burlington VT: Ashgate, 2011), pp. 91–110.
(2015) discusses the differences between Jerome and Augustine’s interpretation of the Antioch incident and how their theological presuppositions differed: Jerome followed Origen (it was only a feigned conflict), but Augustine disagreed. Marco Rizzi
4541 J.A. Myers, “Law, Lies and Letter Writing: An Analysis of Jerome and Augustine on the Antioch Incident (Galatians 2:11–14”, Scottish Journal of Theology 66:2 (2013), pp. 127–139.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0036930613000069
(2019) investigates the first part of the conflict between Augustine and Jerome as found in his 28th letter to Jerome. Rizzi points out that Augustine could not accept Jerome’s interpretation of 2:14, since he believed that the verba in Scripture referred to the divine res. A false statement would thus refer to nothing. Augustine’s semiotic theory also underlay his appreciation for the Septuagint (mentioned in the same letter).
1.7 Theodore of Mopsuestia
Rowan A. Greer
4642 M. Fédou, “Jérôme lecteur de l’Épître aux Galates: L’héritage d’Origène”, in: I. Bochet and M. Fédou (eds.), L’exégèse patristique de l’Épître aux Galates (Collection des Études Augustiniennes: Série Antiquité 197, Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, 2014), pp. 133‑154.
(2011) published an English translation and introduction to Theodore’s commentaries on the minor letters of Paul, based on Swete’s critical edition. Alain le Boulluec
4743 H.A.G. Houghton, “The Biblical Text of Jerome’s Commentary on Galatians”, The Journal of Theological Studies 65:1 (2014), pp. 1–24.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/flt211
(2014) considers the way in which Theodore interpreted the law in his commentary on Galatians: after sin had come, God gave humankind the law to avoid evil, but Christ liberated them from this situation and brought the hope of a life to come when the law would not be necessary anymore. Maya Goldberg
4844 W. Hua, “Galatians 2:11–14 and the Exegetical Controversy between Augustine and Jerome”, Logos and Pneuma – Chinese Journal of Theology
(2018) offers a reconstruction of Theodore’s views of the law as a manifestation of God’s paideia on the basis of the Syriac fragments of his commentary on Galatians. According to Goldberg, for Theodore, Israel’s journey in the Old Testament primarily had a pedagogic meaning, and the law prepared people for salvation by means of moral and ethical teachings.
1.8 Augustine
Alfons Fürst
49
42 (2015), pp. 25–46.
(2002) collected 18 of the 26 letters forming part of the correspondence between Augustine and Jerome, translated them into German and commented on them. For Galatians scholars, the correspondence between the two on 2:11–14 is of particular interest. (See also several other publications on this issue discussed earlier in this chapter, under “Jerome”.) Eric Plumer
5045 M. Rizzi, “Augustine’s Appreciation of the Septuagint in Light of His Semiotic Theory”, Annali di Scienze Religiose 12 (2019), pp. 267–285.
https://doi.org/10.1484/j.asr.5.118276
(2003) published the first English translation of Augustine’s commentary on Galatians, with an introduction and exegetical notes. Anthony Dupont
5146 R.A. Greer (transl.), Theodore of Mopsuestia: The Commentaries on the Minor Epistles of Paul: Translated with an Introduction (Society of Biblical Literature: Writings from the Greco-Roman World 26, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2011), pp. 3–169.
(2010) analyses Augustine’s Homily 168 and his interpretation of 5:6 in order to determine whether Augustine handled the theme of gratia fidei in a similar way in his sermons preached during the Pelagian controversy, and the systematic writings composed during the same time. Dupont answers this question in the affirmative. Ludwig Fladerer’s
5247 A. le Boulluec, “Les temps du régime de la loi et la justification par la foi selon Théodore de Mopsueste dans son Commentaire sur l’Épître aux Galates”, in: I. Bochet and M. Fédou (eds.), L’exégèse patristique de l’Épître aux Galates (Collection des Études Augustiniennes: Série Antiquité 197, Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, 2014), pp. 33‑58.
(2010) primary aim was to study Augustine’s interpretation of Genesis but begins the study with a comparison of Augustine’s commentary on Galatians with those of Victorinus, Ambrose and Jerome. Fladerer shows, amongst other things, that in Augustine’s commentary, the original text played a more important role, that his comments were driven by a pastoral concern (the salvation of his readers), and that he emphasised the correct predisposition of the exegete. Lenka Karfíková
5348 M. Goldberg, “Theodore of Mopsuestia on Divine paideia: Syriac Fragments of His Commentary on Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians”, in: R. Roukema and H. Amirav (eds.), The “New Testament” as a Polemical Tool: Studies in Ancient Christian Anti-Jewish Rhetoric and Beliefs (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus/Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 118, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2018), pp. 113–136.
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666593765.113
(2012) traces the development of the doctrine of grace in Augustine’s theology. In the case of Galatians, Karfíková shows the importance of the contrast in Augustine’s exposition of the letter, between a humility that is caused by grace and a pride in one’s own merits because of the fulfilment of the law. Wendy Elgersma Helleman
5449 A. Fürst, Augustinus–Hieronymus: Epistulae Mutuae: Briefwechsel (Vol. 1 & 2) (Fontes Christiani 41/1–2, Turnhout: Brepols, 2002).
(2013) considers Augustine’s use of Paul’s Sarah-Hagar allegory against the Donatists and Judaisers of his time. Helleman argues that one should judge Augustine against his own context and should also take note of the different ways in which he used the allegory in his writings. This gives rise to a more nuanced view of his use of the allegory. Isabelle Bochet
5550 E. Plumer (transl.), Augustine’s Commentary on Galatians: Introduction, Text, Translation and Notes (Oxford Early Christian Studies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).
https://doi.org/10.1093/0199244391.001.0001
(2014) traces the development in Augustine’s exposition of 5:6 from his commentary on Galatians until his writings against Pelagius: the continuity in Augustine’s exegesis lies in the link he always maintained between faith and works, as well as in the notion that faith is also a gift of grace. Simeon Zahl
5651 A. Dupont, “Fides as donum Dei in Augustine’s Sermones ad Populum: Sermo 168 and Gal. 5,6 as Case Studies”, Sacris Erudiri 49 (2010), pp. 127–150.
https://doi.org/10.1484/J.SE.1.102054
(2014) discusses Augustine’s interpretation of 5:16–25 and, in particular, the way in which he viewed the relationship between divine and human agency. According to Zahl, Augustine’s views can help one to understand this passage better because of the affective anthropology that can be seen here, as well as the link that Augustine made between divine and human agency and ethics. Geoffrey D. Dunn
5752 L. Fladerer, Augustinus als Exeget: Zu seinen Kommentaren des Galaterbriefes und der Genesis (Sitzungsberichte: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften: Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 795, Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2010).
(2015) thinks that scholars who believe that Augustine’s interpretation of 2:11–14 is dominated by his anti-Donatism, are not correct. This is only true of the way in which he handles the incident in De baptism. In other instances, such a tendency cannot be found. Wendy Elgersma Helleman
5853 L. Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (Vigiliae Christianae Supplements 115, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2012), pp. 61-65.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004229211
(2016) studies two sermons of Augustine containing reflections on 4:21–31 in order to determine if they may be regarded as anti-Semitic. Helleman concludes that one should rather speak of a degree of anti-Judaism in them. Didier Méhu
5954 W.E. Helleman, “‘Abraham Had Two Sons’: Augustine and the Allegory of Sarah and Hagar (Galatians 4:21–31)”, Calvin Theological Journal 48:1 (2013), pp. 35–64.
(2018) explains how the dialectics between aedificatio and dedicatio work in Homily 163 of Augustine, a homily based on 5:16 in which the process of salvation and the construction of a church is compared. Jonathan D. Teubner
6055 I. Bochet, “Fides quae per dilectionem operatur: L’originalité de l’exégèse Augustinienne de Galates 5,6”, in: I. Bochet and M. Fedou (eds.), L’exégèse patristique de l’Épître aux Galates (Collection des Études Augustiniennes: Série Antiquité 197, Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, 2014), pp. 155–180.
(2018) draws attention to the role of prayer in the works of Augustine, Boethius and Benedict. For Galatians research, the influence that the notion of “putting on Christ” (3:27) had on Augustine’s views of prayer is important.
1.9 Theodoret of Cyrus
Marie-Odile Boulnois
6156 S. Zahl, “The Drama of Agency: Affective Augustinianism and Galatians”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 335–352.
(2014) explains how Theodoret’s notion of a symphonia between the Father and the Son, between Paul and the other apostles, and between the law (coming from God) and the gospel is developed in Theodoret’s commentary on Galatians. For Theodoret, it was very important that Christ was the end of the law and that believers should thus live according to faith.
1.10 Other
Petra Heldt
6257 G.D. Dunn, “Augustine’s Use of the Pauline Portrayal of Peter in Galatians 2”, Augustinian Studies 46:1 (2015), pp. 23–42.
https://doi.org/10.5840/augstudies201542813
(2006) explains how the Naassenes and the Valentinians interpreted 4:26–27 (as reported by Hippolytus in his Refutation of all Heresies). Heldt shows that all of them – the Naassenes and the Valentinians, as well as Hippolytus – used the text to delineate an identity for Gentiles without really giving attention to Paul’s own skopos with the text. Brouria Bitton-Ashkelony and Aryeh Kofsky
6358 W.E. Helleman, “Casting out Hagar: Anti-Judaism in the Sermons of Augustine”, Calvin Theological Journal 51:1 (2016), pp. 20–36.
(2006) discuss the monastic school that existed at Gaza from the fourth to the seventh century CE. One of the issues that is highlighted is the way in which 6:2 was interpreted in this community: a monk’s spiritual father could participate actively in a monk’s penance by assuming responsibility for the sin that the monk had committed. In turn, the monk had to vow to be totally obedient to his spiritual father. Basil S. Davis
6459 D. Méhu, “La dialectique aedificatio-dedicatio dans l’oeuvre d’Augustin d’Hippone: À propos du sermon 163”, Laval Théologique et Philosophique 74:2 (2018), pp. 181–191.
https://doi.org/10.7202/1058092ar
(2007) draws attention to Severianus of Gabala’s interpretation of 6:6, a verse difficult to link to the rest of the letter. According to Severianus, in this verse, Paul asked the Galatians to stop supporting those who encouraged them to keep the law and rather support those who were proclaiming his view of the law. He used vv. 7–8 to motivate Paul’s request. Davis then develops Severianus’s interpretation further (and somewhat differently). Juan Antonio Gil-Tamayo
6560 J.D. Teubner, Prayer after Augustine: A Study in the Development of the Latin Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), pp. 69–73.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198767176.001.0001
(2008) elucidates the way in which 4:21–31 was interpreted in Antiochian exegesis: whereas the Alexandrian School used it to justify their allegorical interpretation of Old Testament texts, the School of Antioch interpreted it in a disciplined way, identifying relevant hermeneutic criteria. Peter W. Martens
6661 M.-O. Boulnois, “De la symphonie trinitaire à la symphonie apostolique: La loi et l’évangile dans l’exégèse de l’Épître aux Galates chez Théodoret de Cyr”, in: I. Bochet and M. Fédou (eds.), L’exégèse patristique de l’Épître aux Galates (Collection des Études Augustiniennes: Série Antiquité 197, Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, 2014), pp. 59–81.
(2010) traces the reception of Paul’s use of Deuteronomy in Galatians 3:13 by Justin Martyr, Augustine and Theodore Anu Qurrah. Martens shows that these authors followed and developed Paul’s interpretation of the text as implying God’s curse on the Messiah. Bas van Os
6762 P. Heldt, “Delineating Identity in the Second and Third Century CE: The Case of the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians 4:21–31 in the Writings of Hippolytus”, Studia Patristica 42 (2006), pp. 163–168.
(2010) explains how Paul linked Sarah to the New Jerusalem of Isaiah 54:1 (in Galatians 4:21–5:1), how early Christians re-interpreted this prophecy in Isaiah in the light of the fact that Gentiles formed the majority in the Christian movement in their times, how Gnostic Christians (as is evident in particular from the Gospel of Philip) interpreted the Isaiah text allegorically and how Irenaeus reacted to the claim that non-Gnostic Christians were children of the slave woman. Justin M. Rogers
6863 B. Bitton-Ashkelony and A. Kofsky, The Monastic School of Gaza (Vigiliae Christianae Supplements 78, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2006), pp. 145–156.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047408444_009
(2014) points out that Didymus the Blind was the first exegete who tried to harmonise Philonic and Pauline interpretations of Hagar and Sarah. Rogers explains how Didymus followed Philo’s (literal and allegorical) interpretations of the two figures consistently, but how he also combined such a Philonic interpretation with Paul’s interpretation in Galatians. Karla Pollmann and Mark W. Elliott
6964 B.S. Davis, “Severianus of Gabala and Galatians 6:6–10”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 69:2 (2007), pp. 292–301.
(2014) investigate the way in which Galatians was interpreted by Marius Victorinus, Ambrosiaster, Jerome and Augustine, as well as a work of verse, Carmen adversus Marcionitas. Pollmann and Elliott conclude that these works should be taken seriously, since they offer insights into the meaning of the letter. Edwina Murphy
7065 J.A. Gil-Tamayo, “‘Todo Esto Tiene un Sentido Alegórico’ (Ga 4,24): La Exégesis Antioquena de Gálatas 4,21–31”, Scripta Theologica 40:1 (2008), pp. 35–63.
(2014) explains how Cyprian (bishop) of Carthage interpreted Galatians: his interpretation was dominated by pastoral concerns, his attempts at uniting his congregation and keeping them on the right track while they experienced persecution, plague and schism. In his interpretation of Galatians, Cyprian also avoided quoting verses that could depict the law negatively. Matthew V. Novenson
7166 P.W. Martens, “‘Anyone Hung on a Tree is under God’s Curse’ (Deuteronomy 21:23): Jesus’ Crucifixion and Interreligious Exegetical Debate in Late Antiquity”, Ex Auditu 26 (2010), pp. 69–90.
(2015) draws attention to Tertullian’s use of Paul: About 40% of his New Testament quotations come from the Pauline letters (1 Corinthians is cited the most – three times as often as 2 Corinthians, Galatians or Ephesians). Whereas some scholars interpret Tertullian’s preference in Pauline texts as an indication that he did not understand Paul correctly, Novenson suggests that one should rather view Tertullian’s interpretation of Paul as a “rational reconstruction” (i.e., not a historical reconstruction) of Paul for his own time. Todd S. Berzon
7267 B. van Os, “Children of the Slave Woman: The Gnostic Christian Reinterpretation of Paul’s Allegory of Hagar”, in: M. Goodman, G.H. van Kooten and J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten (eds.), Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham (Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions 13, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2010), pp. 387–400.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004188433.i-578.127
(2016) discusses the way in which 3:1 was interpreted by Marius Victorinus, Ambrosiaster, Augustine, John Chrysostom and Jerome. According to Berzon, for these exegetes, communal harmony in their own times served as an indication of the extent to which Paul’s legacy was continued or not. Raphael A. Cadenhead
7368 J.M. Rogers, “The Philonic and the Pauline: Hagar and Sarah in the Exegesis of Didymus the Blind”, The Studia Philonica Annual 26 (2014), pp. 57–77.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt9qh1xp.6
(2018) traces the development of Gregory of Nyssa’s ascetical theology. In the case of Galatians, Cadenhead points out a development in Gregory’s interpretation of 3:28: during the first phase, he focused on the eschatological erasure of sexual differences or the striving of the ascetic to appropriate both male and female virtues; during the later phase, he emphasised how being male or female could be transcended by a longing for God who is neither male nor female. Soultana Lamprou and Viera Zozul’aková
7469 K. Pollmann and M.W. Elliott, “Galatians in the Early Church: Five Case Studies”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 40‑61.
(2019) highlight the Patristic interpretation of 3:28, and in particular, the importance of the Christocentric basis in Patristic exegesis, which was also regarded as a criterion for the dissolution of all types of distinctions. According to Marion L. Soards
7570 E. Murphy, “Divine Ordinances and Life-Giving Remedies: Galatians in the Writings of Cyprian of Carthage”, Journal of Theological Interpretation 8:1 (2014), pp. 81–101.
(2019), the issues that the Early Church had to deal with, as reflected in Galatians amongst others, continued to cause problems, even until the fourth century CE. Soards illustrates this by referring to the Pseudo-Clementine Literature. Richard A. Muller
7671 M.V. Novenson, “The Pauline Epistles in Tertullian’s Bible”, Scottish Journal of Theology 68:4 (2015), pp. 471–483.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0036930615000253
(2020) traces the Patristic discussions about Christianity being the “third race” (an idea influenced amongst others by 3:27–28). In particular, Muller shows how Eusebius of Caesarea developed this notion theologically and philosophically. Luis Josué Salés
7772 T.S. Berzon, “‘O, Foolish Galatians’: Imagining Pauline Community in Late Antiquity”, Church History 85:3 (2016), pp. 435–467.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009640716000433
(2020) engages critically with the notion that Paul was a misogynist by first discussing what can be gleaned from his seven authentic letters in this regard and by secondly pointing out that, according to Epiphanios of Salamis, in the second century CE, a community in Phrygia known as the Kuintillians ordained women, amongst other things, basing such a practice on 3:28. Salés believes that the Kuintillians probably preserved an apostolic tradition according to which there was equal access for males and females to leadership in the church. M. David Litwa
7873 R.A. Cadenhead, The Body and Desire: Gregory of Nyssa’s Ascetical Theology (Christianity in Late Antiquity 4, Oakland CA: University of California Press, 2018).
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv9hvt61
(2020) discusses the reception of the curse mentioned in 3:13 in some texts from Nag Hammadi. Litwa points out that in these texts the curse was often restricted to Jesus’ mortal part only. It was thought that his spiritual core was not touched by the curse. This is similar to the hermeneutics underlying the way in which the Adam-Eve narrative was sometimes interpreted in Nag Hammadi texts: they were cursed, but their spiritual cores were untouched.
2. The Middle Ages
2.1 Sedelius Scottus
Michael C. Sloan
7974 S. Lamprou and V. Zozul’aková, “The Abolition of Ethnic, Racial, or Cultural Distinctions in the Apostle Paul: Indicative Patristic Approach”, Konštantínove Listy 12:2 (2019), pp. 33–42.
https://doi.org/10.17846/CL.2019.12.2.33-42
(2012) published an introduction and translation of Sedelius Scottus’s Prologue to the Collectaneum in Apostolicum, as well as of his commentaries on Galatians and Ephesians.
2.2 Thomas Aquinas
According to Mark Koehne
8075 M.L. Soards, “Following Paul Along the Way of the Parting of Judaism and Christianity”, Biblica 100:2 (2019), pp. 249–271.
https://doi.org/10.2143/bib.100.2.3286601
(2002), Aquinas interpreted the expression “works of the law” in 2:15–16 as referring to ceremonial precepts. He distinguished this from “doing the law” – part of the process of justification sprouting from faith acting in love. In 2008, a French translation of Aquinas’s commentary on Galatians
8176 R.A. Muller, “Eusebius of Caesarea and the ‘Third Race’: Christianity, Hellenization, and a Harnackian Irony”, Mid-America Journal of Theology 31 (2020), pp. 7–26.
was published. The preface was written by Jean-Pierre Torrell, the introduction by Gilbert Dahan and the notes were composed by Jean Borella and Jean-Éric Stroobant de Saint-Éloy. In 2012, an English translation of Aquinas’s commentaries on Galatians and Ephesians appeared in the Latin/English series of Aquinas’s works.
8277 L.J. Salés, “Galatians 3:28 and the Ordination of Women in Second-Century Pauline Churches”, in: G. Thomas and E. Narinskaya (eds.), Women and Ordination in the Orthodox Church: Explorations in Theology and Practice (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2020), pp. 58–78.
The translation was done by Fabian R. Larcher and Matthew L. Lamb. One of the issues that Matthew A. Tapie
8378 M.D. Litwa, “The Curse of the Creator: Galatians 3:13 and Negative Demiurgy”, in: F. Watson and S. Parkhouse (eds.), Telling the Christian Story Differently: Counter-Narratives from Nag Hammadi and Beyond (The Reception of Jesus in the First Three Centuries 5, London/New
(2014) discusses in a book on Aquinas on Israel and the church is Aquinas’s view of the law as can be deduced from his commentary on Galatians. Tapie summarises it as follows: “The ceremonial law as fulfilled, dead, and deadly”.
84
York NY/Oxford: T & T Clark Bloomsbury, 2020), pp. 13–30.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567679543.ch-001
William M. Wright IV
8579 M.C. Sloan, The Harmonius Organ of Sedulius Scottus: Introduction to His Collectaneum in Apostolum and Translation of Its Prologue and Commentaries on Galatians and Ephesians (Millennium Studies in the Culture and History of the First Millennium CE 39, Berlin: De Gruyter, 2012).
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110281880
(2015) explains Aquinas’s interpretation of 3:28. Wright shows that Aquinas tended to emphasise the regenerative grace that the rational soul receives in baptism. Aquinas believed that everybody received this in baptism prior to any differences. Bartosz Adamski
8680 M. Koehne, “Saint Thomas Aquinas: On ‘Works of the Law’ and ‘Faith of Christ’ in Galatians 2:15–16”, Scripture Bulletin 32:1 (2002), pp. 9–20.
(2015) outlines Aquinas’s views on the freedom in Christ in his comments on Galatians 5 and its contemporary relevance: freedom is achieved through union with Christ and love is the gift whereby freedom becomes a reality. According to Matthew Simpkins
8781 T. d’Aquin, Commentaire de l’Epître aux Galates: Préface de Jean-Pierre Torrell, o.p. Introduction par Gilbert Dahan: Traduction et tables par Jean-Éric Stroobant de Saint-Eloy, o.s.b.: Annotation par Jean Borella et Jean-Éric Stroobant de Saint-Eloy, o.s.b. (Paris: Cerf, 2008).
(2016), Aquinas’s model of friendship/charity as found in his explanation of 3:28 can help democracy in our times with its crisis of confidence, since Aquinas teaches us that equality and difference can co-exist. Anton M. ten Klooster
8882 F.R. Larcher and M.L. Lamb (transls.), St. Thomas Aquinas: Commentary on the Letters of Saint Paul to the Galatians and Ephesians (Latin/English Edition of the Works of St. Thomas Aquinas 39, Lander WY: Aquinas Institute for the Study of Sacred Doctrine, 2012).
(2019) clarifies the role that “the fruit of the Spirit” played in Aquinas’s theology. For Aquinas, “the fruit of the Spirit” was like pleasure to Aristotle. It was the delight coming with actions focusing on union with God whereas for Aristotle, pleasure was caused by actions focusing on natural happiness.
2.3 Nicholas of Lyra
Edward Arthur Naumann
8983 M.A. Tapie, Aquinas on Israel and the Church: The Question of Supersessionism in the Theology of Thomas Aquinas (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2014), pp. 109–135.
(2016) published an English translation of Nicholas of Lyra’s literal commentary on Galatians.
2.4 General studies
Martin Meiser
9084 Op. cit., p. 109.
(2007) offers a detailed study of the reception of Galatians, spanning the period from the Church Fathers until Bede. Ian Christopher Levy
9185 W.M. Wright IV, “Galatians 3:28 in Thomas Aquinas’ Lectures on the Pauline Letters: A Study in Thomistic Reception”, Journal of the Bible and Its Reception 2:1 (2015), pp. 1–23.
https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2015-0001
(2008) discusses the important role that 5:6 played in medieval Galatians commentaries. It was perceived as the hermeneutical key not only for unlocking the letter but also for unlocking the right way to Christian life. Thomas M. Izbicki
9286 B. Adamski, “Wolność w Chrystusie: Aktualność Nauczania Św: Tomasza z Akwinu o Wolności Chrześcijańskiej na Podstawie Piątego Rozdziału Super Epistolam S. Pauli Apostoli ad Galatas Lectura”, Biblica et Patristica Thoruniensia 8:3 (2015), pp. 15–25.
https://doi.org/10.12775/BPTh.2015.014
(2009) explains how two texts (Galatians 2:11 and Acts 15) were interpreted during the Great Schism (1378–1417). Izbicki shows that the rebuke of Peter was interpreted in various ways: as supporting the action of a council or of a theologian confronting his superior(s), as something to be ignored, since Peter had repented or as something to be restricted to papal heresy, thus excluding unacceptable conduct. Elsa Marmursztejn
9387 M. Simpkins, “Democracy’s Crisis of Confidence: Can Aquinas’s Friendship Model of Society Help?”, Crucible January (2016), pp. 28–38.
(2011) explains the way in which popes and doctors in the 13th century interpreted the fact that Paul blamed Peter in this pericope and what this implied for the relationship between the doctors and the papacy. Ian Christopher Levy
9488 A. M. ten Klooster, “Aquinas on the Fruits of the Holy Spirit as the Delight of the Christian Life”, Journal of Moral Theology 8: Special Issue 2 (2019), pp. 80–94.
(2011) translated six commentaries (or extracts of commentaries) on Galatians, published between the ninth and fourteenth centuries: those of Haimo of Auxerre, Bruno the Carthusian, Peter Lombard, Robert of Melun, Robert Grosseteste and Nicholas of Lyra. Carolyn Muessig
9589 E.A. Naumann (ed. & transl.), Nicholas of Lyra: Literal Commentary on Galatians: Translated with an Introduction and Notes (TEAMS Commentary Series, Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 2016).
(2013) discusses the evolution in the interpretation of the stigmata that Paul mentioned in 6:17: invisible marks that bishops or priests received at ordination (seventh century), a stigmatic spirituality that could be achieved by vows and penances (Peter Damian), the marks/wounds that crusaders bore in or as result of battle (twelfth century), and, finally, a pious superlative that could be achieved by devout lay people (thirteenth century). In a book published in 2020, Muessig
9690 M. Meiser, Galater (Novum Testamentum Patristicum 9, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007).
offers a comprehensive overview of the way in which Paul’s stigmata have been interpreted. Amongst others, Muessig shows that women more frequently reported having stigmata than men and that the perception of stigmata was later influenced by doctrinal differences between Catholics and Protestants. Felice Lifshitz
9791 I.C. Levy, “Fides quae per caritatem operatur: Love as the Hermeneutical Key in Medieval Galatians Commentaries”, Cistercian Studies Quarterly 43:1 (2008), pp. 41–61.
(2014) investigates women monasteries in the Main Valley during the eighth century. One of the issues that Lifshitz discusses is a crucifixion miniature used to introduce Paul’s letters. According to Lifshitz, the image represents both Paul and Jesus (Galatians 2:20). Deeana Klepper
9892 T.M. Izbicki, “The Authority of Peter and Paul: The Use of Biblical Authority During the Great Schism”, in: J. Rollo-Koster and T.M. Izbicki (eds.), A Companion to the Great Western Schism (1378–1417) (Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 17, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 375–393.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004162778.i-472.34
(2015) explains how it happened in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries that Hagar, traditionally associated with the old law and the synagogue, came to be associated by Christians with the Jews living in their midst. Klepper also highlights the role that Paul’s allegory in Galatians played in this process. François Soyer
9993 E. Marmursztejn, “Autorité et vérité dans les relations entre la papauté et les docteurs parisiens au XIIIe siècle”, in: G.L. Potestà and E. Müller-Luckner (eds.), Autorität und Wahrheit: Kirchliche Vorstellungen, Normen und Verfahren (13. bis 15. Jahrhundert) (Schriften des Historischen Kollegs 84, München: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 2011), pp. 21–44.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446753-004
(2016) draws attention to Alonso de Espina’s polemic against Jews and the descendants of Jewish converts. According to Soyer, it may seem as if this goes against the meaning of 3:28, but this is not the case, since De Espina distinguished between general converso judaising and genuine Jewish conversion to Christendom. Lásló Sándor Chardonnens
10094 I.C. Levy (transl. & ed.), The Letter to the Galatians (The Bible in Medieval Tradition, Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2011).
(2017) discusses hemerology (i.e., a method of divination) in medieval Europe. Amongst others, Chardonnens points out that Paul’s criticism of observing days, months, seasons and years (in 4:9–11) was used by Christian exegetes against hemerology, which was regarded as a vain human practice. Giancarlo Fantechi
10195 C. Muessig, “Signs of Salvation: The Evolution of Stigmatic Spirituality before Francis of Assisi”, Church History 82:1 (2013), pp. 40–68.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S000964071200251X
(2018) draws attention to the many glosses added to New Testament writings dealing with the relationship between Christians and Jews, in particular in Galatians, in manuscript Escorial I.I.6 (thirteenth century). According to Fantechi, this may be interpreted as an indication that converted Jews in the Leon and Castile were not easily accepted by church and society. Jessalyn Bird
10296 C. Muessig, The Stigmata in Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020).
(2018) studies sermons for Good Friday and Holy Week in crusade preaching during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. One of the examples that Bird discusses is the way in which Odo of Cheriton preached on 6:14 (“Far from me to boast save in the cross …”). Martin Mayerhofer
10397 F. Lifshitz, Religious Women in Early Carolingian Francia: A Study of Manuscript Transmission and Monastic Culture (Fordham Series in Medieval Studies, New York NY: Fordham University Press, 2014), pp. 65–86.
https://doi.org/10.5422/fordham/9780823256877.001.0001
(2020) traces the way in which four Pauline passages referring to Paul’s spiritual fatherhood were connected in Patristic and Medieval Pauline commentaries to the priesthood. One of these passages is Galatians 4:19. In this instance, Mayerhofer draws attention to an anonymous commentary from the ninth century that follows Jerome and Augustine in emphasising the necessity of love for Christ to take shape in someone (like Augustine) and the fact that Paul does not only speak like a father but also like a mother (like Jerome).
3. The Sixteenth to the Eighteenth Centuries
3.1 Desiderius Erasmus
According to Johannes Kunze
10498 D. Klepper, “Historicizing Allegory: The Jew as Hagar in Medieval Christian Text and Image”, Church History 84:2 (2015), pp. 308–344.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009640715000086
(2000), an investigation of Luther’s commentaries on Galatians and Psalms shows that Erasmus had a greater influence on Luther than is usually accepted. Miekske L. van Poll-van de Lisdonk
10599 F. Soyer, “‘All One in Christ Jesus’? Spiritual Closeness, Genealogical Determinism and the Conversion of Jews in Alonso de Espina’s Fortalitium Fidei”, Journal of Spanish Cultural Studies 17:3 (2016), pp. 239–254.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14636204.2016.1201342
(2003) draws attention to three letters that Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda wrote to Erasmus in which he pointed out that the translation of 4:25 in the Vulgate and in Erasmus’s Novum Testamentum did not reflect Paul’s thought clearly and that the Greek text solved this problem. Erasmus responded positively and added an annotation on this verse in the 1535 edition of his Annotationes (without referring to De Sepúlveda). One of the examples that Riemer A. Faber
106100 L.S. Chardonnens, “Hemerology in Medieval Europe”, in: D. Harper and M. Kalinowski (eds.), Books of Fate and Popular Culture in Early China: The Daybook Manuscripts of the Warring States, Qin and Han (Handbook of Oriental Studies: Section 4: China 33, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017), pp. 373–407.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004349315_012
(2009) uses to show how Erasmus depicts Paul as the ideal pastor comes from Erasmus’s Annotations on Galatians. Erasmus emphasises the following qualities of Paul: his concern for and a desire to correct the Galatians, his humility and his learnedness. In 2009, a further volume of Erasmus’s Annotations appeared in the Amsterdam edition of his complete works, edited by Miekske L. van Poll-van de Lisdonk.
107101 G. Fantechi, “Biblia y Sociedad en León y Castilla en el Siglo XIII: Las Glosas de la Epístola a los Gálatas de la Biblia Escorial i.i.6”, Rivista di Cultura Classica e Medioevale 60:1 (2018), pp. 431–460.
https://doi.org/10.19272/201806501007
This volume contains a critical edition of the Latin text, an introduction and commentary of (amongst others) the Annotations on Galatians. Christine Christ von Wedel
108102 J. Bird, “‘Far Be It from Me to Glory Save in the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ’ (Galatians 6:14): Crusade Preaching and Sermons for Good Friday and Holy Week”, in: M.E. Parker, B. Halliburton and A. Romine (eds.), Crusading in Art, Thought and Will (The Medieval Mediterranean: Peoples, Economies and Cultures, 400–1500 115, 2018), pp. 129–165.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004386136_007
(2013) discusses the development of Erasmus’s historical methodology. One of the issues that receives attention is his doctrine of justification – discussed in the light of this Annotations and Paraphrases on Romans and Galatians.
3.2 Martin Luther
Arland J. Hultgren
109103 M. Mayerhofer, “The Spiritual Fatherhood of the Priest in Patristic and Medieval Pauline Commentaries”, Logos 23:2 (2020), pp. 105–128.
https://doi.org/10.1353/log.2020.0014
(2000) focuses on two sets of Luther’s lectures on Galatians (1519 and 1535), in particular on the following issues: Luther’s views of texts and translation issues, Luther as exegete and expositor and how the two sets of lectures differed. Mark A. Seifrid
110104 J. Kunze, Erasmus und Luther: Der Einfluss des Erasmus auf die Kommentierung des Galaterbriefes und der Psalmen durch Luther 1519–1521 (Arbeiten zur Historischen und Systematischen Theologie, Hamburg: LIT Verlag, 2000).
(2003) explains Luther’s interpretation of justification in 2:15–21. He interpreted it forensically but regarded it as more than a mere declaration on God’s part or just a transaction performed in the past to be accepted by humans at a later stage; one only has justification as one grasps Christ. Jörg Kailus
111105 M.L. van Poll-van de Lisdonk, “Erasmus’ Note on Gal 4:25: The Connection between Mount Sinai and Jerusalem”, in: F. García Martínez and G.P. Luttikhuizen (eds.), Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome: Studies in Ancient Cultural Interaction in Honour of A. Hilhorst (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 82, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2003), pp. 255–262.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047402794_021
(2004) highlights the relationship between law and gospel in Luther’s commentary on Galatians and argues that this distinction was primarily a spiritual concept (“seelsorgerliche Grösse”), which was aimed at overcoming afflictions (“Anfechtungen”). Stephen Westerholm
112106 R. Faber, “Desiderius Erasmus’ Representation of Paul as Paragon of Learned Piety”, in: R.W. Holder (ed.), A Companion to Paul in the Reformation (Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 15, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 43–60.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004174924.i-660.11
(2004) offers a detailed and critical review of the “Lutheran Paul” and the twentieth-century response to it. One of the themes that Westerholm investigates is the theme “justification by faith”. In the case of Galatians, Westerholm finds that although it is true that Paul did not address Pelagianism or sixteenth-century disputes, he nevertheless insisted that the unrighteous were declared righteous because of faith. According to Robert G. Artinian
113107 M.L. van Poll-van de Lisdonk (ed.), Opera omnia Desiderii Erasmi Roterodami: VI-9 Ordinis sexti tomus nonus: Annotationes in Novum Testamentum (Pars Quinta) (Leiden/Boston MA: 2009).
(2006), a thorough investigation of Luther’s 1535 commentary on Galatians shows that it is not fair to accuse him of reading his own religious context into Paul’s letter or to claim that he regarded Jews as the ultimate symbol of everything that is false in religion. Mickey L. Mattox
114108 C. Christ-von Wedel, Erasmus of Rotterdam: Advocate of a New Christianity (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013), pp. 144–154. Revised and enlarged version of: C. Christ-von Wedel, Erasmus von Rotterdam: Anwalt eines neuzeitlichen Christentums (Münster: LIT Verlag, 2003).
(2008) investigates the concept fortuita misericordia (“fortuitous mercy”) in Luther’s 1531 exegesis of Galatians and in his lectures on Genesis. According to Mattox, Luther’s views in this regard were based on his understanding and experience of God’s grace. Ronald D. Patkus
115109 A.J. Hultgren, “Luther on Galatians”, Word & World 20:3 (2000), pp. 232‑238.
(2008) focuses on the various editions of Luther’s commentary on Galatians (printed 21 times during his lifetime), and, in particular, on the “para-text” (illustrations, etc.). According to Patkus, the earlier printings had a more “humanist” tone and the later ones a more “religious” tone. Stephen Chester
116110 M.A. Seifrid, “Paul, Luther, and Justification in Gal 2:15–21”, Westminster Theological Journal 65:2 (2003), pp. 215–230.
(2009) argues that, contrary to what is often claimed, the failure of traditional Protestant interpretations of Pauline theology to relate justification by faith to participatory categories does not stem from Luther. In Luther’s exegesis of Galatians, he integrated the two effectively. Michael F. Bird
117111 J. Kailus, Gesetz und Evangelium in Luthers Grossem Galaterkommentar sowie bei Werner Elert und Paul Althaus: Darstellung in Grundzügen und Vergleich (Theologie 68, Münster: LIT Verlag, 2004).
(2009) points out that Reformed exegetes have understood many Pauline themes correctly, but that a better grasp on historical particularities provides one with better theological insight. This is demonstrated by means of 2:11–21. One of the issues that Mickey L. Mattox
118112 S. Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The “Lutheran” Paul and His Critics (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2004), pp. 366–383.
(2009) discusses in a study of Luther’s reception of Paul, is his lectures on Galatians. Mattox points out that Luther identified justification as the central theme of the letter and that he distinguished “righteousness by faith” from all other types of religious or civil righteousness. Luther also recognised his own experiences in Paul’s experiences. Asger Chr. Højlund
119113 R.G. Artinian, “Luther after the Stendahl/Sanders Revolution: A Responsive Evaluation of Luther’s View of First-Century Judaism in His 1535 Commentary on Galatians”, Trinity Journal 27:1 (2006), pp. 77–99.
(2010) draws attention to Luther’s interpretation of Leviticus 18:5 in the light of his understanding of law and gospel in his commentary on Galatians. According to Højlund, for Luther there was a deep coherence between the two but also an important difference between them – a helpful perspective for our current discussions of the matter. Peter Matheson
120114 M.L. Mattox, “Fortuita misericordia: Martin Luther on the Salvation of Biblical Outsiders”, Pro Ecclesia 17:4 (2008), pp. 423–441.
https://doi.org/10.1177/106385120801700404
(2011) offers an overview of Luther’s reception of Galatians. According to Matheson, Luther may be ranked as one of the most important interpreters of Paul (like Augustine). Jussi Kalervo Koivisto
121115 R.D. Patkus, “Biblical Commentary as Reformation Commodity: The Role of the Paratext in Luther’s Galatians”, Reformation 13:1 (2008), pp. 51–75.
https://doi.org/10.1558/refm.v13.051
(2011) shows that Luther’s interpretation of the term fascinare (“bewitch”) in 3:1 was based on Biblical scholarship, folklore and perspectives of earlier commentators. Luther understood the term as referring to witchcraft (linked to the devil) and psychological and spiritual disturbances. One of the examples that Brooks Schramm and Kirsi I. Stjerna
122116 S. Chester, “It Is no Longer I Who Live: Justification by Faith and Participation in Christ in Martin Luther’s Exegesis of Galatians”, New Testament Studies 55:3 (2009), pp. 315–337.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S002868850900023X
(2012) pick to illustrate Luther’s attitude to the Jews is his exposition of the Sarah-Hagar allegory in his commentary on Galatians. Luther’s hostility to what he regarded as Jewish exclusivism is highlighted. Johannes Klösges
123117 M.F. Bird, “What If Martin Luther Had Read the Dead Sea Scrolls? Historical Particularity and Theological Interpretation in Pauline Theology: Galatians as a Test Case”, Journal of Theological Interpretation 3:1 (2009), pp. 107–125.
(2012) explains the theological implications that Luther drew from 2:16 regarding justification, compares these to the findings of the New Perspective on Paul, situates Luther’s views within developments of a theology of grace and discusses the contemporary implications of all of this. Javier A. Garcia
124118 M.L. Mattox, “Martin Luther’s Reception of Paul”, in: R.W. Holder (ed.), A Companion to Paul in the Reformation (Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 15, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 93–128.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004174924.i-660.18
(2013) engages critically with Tuomo Mannermaa’s
125119 A.C. Højlund, “‘The One Who Does Them Shall Live by Them’: Luther’s Interpretation of Leviticus 18:5 in the Light of His Understanding of Law and Gospel in His Commentary on Galatians”, in: T. Johansson, R. Kolb and J.A. Steiger (eds.), Hermeneutica Sacra: Studien zur Auslegung der Heiligen Schrift im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert/Studies of the Interpretation of Holy Scripture in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (Historia Hermeneutica: Series Studia 9, Berlin/New York NY: De Gruyter, 2010), pp. 111–130.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110236873.111
interpretation of Luther (which gave rise to the Finnish School in Luther Studies) by looking at Luther’s interpretation of Galatians. According to Garcia, Mannermaa’s views help one to rediscover Luther’s notion of forensic justification. Sarah Hinlicky Wilson
126120 P. Matheson, “Luther on Galatians”, in: M. Lieb, E. Mason, J. Roberts and C. Rowland (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Reception History of the Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 621–634.
(2013) points out that Luther refers in two ways to the law in his 1531/35 commentary on Galatians, in a relational sense (the law as mediator between humankind and God) and an instructive sense (the law as content, e.g., the decalogue as interpreted by Christ). According to Wilson, Lutherans wrongly tend to focus only on the first one. Francois Wessels
127121 J.K. Koivisto, “Martin Luther’s Conception of fascinare (Gal. 3:1)”, Biblical Interpretation 19:4/5 (2011), pp. 471–495.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156851511X595521
(2013) thinks that Luther’s view of the situation in Galatia and Paul’s attempts at persuading the Galatians were not entirely correct. Nevertheless, Luther was not totally wrong about the law, since Paul’s warnings about the law as an identity marker could indeed be used to caution against other forms of misuse of the law. Jens Schröter
128122 B. Schramm and K.I. Stjerna (eds.), Martin Luther, the Bible, and the Jewish People: A Reader (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2012), pp. 59–66.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt22nm6gf
(2013) discusses the implications of the New Perspective on Paul for the Lutheran understanding of Paul, in particular by looking at 2:15–17. Schröter highlights the importance of the notion of God’s justifying grace but also points out that the social and ecclesiological implications of this idea sometimes do not receive enough attention in Lutheran circles. Jonathan A. Linebaugh
129123 J. Klösges, “Gnade wird gelebt, nicht doziert! Gedanken zur Rechtfertigungslehre Martin Luthers nach seinen Kommentaren zu Gal 2,16 auf der Folie des frühchristlichen Konflikts zwischen Paulus und den Gemeinden in Galatien”, Catholica 66:4 (2012), pp. 292–319.
(2013) disagrees with views that Reformed interpretations of justification fail to coordinate the notion of justification and Christology. According to Linebaugh, an investigation of Luther’s interpretation of 2:16 and 19–20 shows that his view of faith was radically Christo-centric. For Guillermo Hansen
130124 J.A. Garcia, “A Critique of Mannermaa on Luther and Galatians”, Lutheran Quarterly 27:1 (2013), pp. 33–55. See also the shorter version published later: J.A. Garcia, “‘Not an Idle Quality or an Empty Husk in the Heart’: A Critique of Tuomo Mannermaa on Luther and Galatians”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 132–142.
(2013), Luther’s interpretation of Galatians opens a window to a new understanding of what it means to be human. Faith displaces a socially and ecclesiastically constructed self-consciousness so that a Christ-consciousness can emerge. Timothy Wengert
131125 T. Mannermaa, Christ Present in Faith: Luther’s View of Justification (Edited by Kirsi Stjerna) (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2005).
(2014) discusses Luther’s interpretation of 3:6–14 and shows that his approach to exegesis was dominated by two objectives: outlining doctrine and explaining its effect for believers (doctrina et usus, “doctrine and use”).David Parry
132126 S.H. Wilson, “The Law of God”, Lutheran Quarterly 27:4 (2013), pp. 373‑398.
(2014) points out that scholars of John Bunyan’s theology are well aware of the influence that Luther’s commentary on Galatians had on him but that they seem unaware of the fact that the specific English translation of Luther’s commentary that Bunyan had read contained a preface by bishop Edwin Sandys and that this preface influenced Bunyan’s reception of Luther’s commentary. Scott Hafemann
133127 F. Wessels, “Did Luther Get It Altogether Wrong? Luther’s Interpretation of the Function of the Mosaic Law in Galatians”, Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif 54:5 (2013), pp. 321–330.
https://doi.org/10.5952/54-0-367
(2014) investigates Luther’s interpretation of 3:6–14 critically. Hafemann points out that one can agree with Luther on several points but that there are also views in his interpretation that one has to reject. Sin-young Kim
134128 J. Schröter, “‘The New Perspective on Paul’: Eine Anfrage an die Lutherische Paulusdeutung?”, Lutherjahrbuch 80 (2013), pp. 142–158.
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666874451.142
(2014) criticises the tendency in modern scholarship to minimise Luther’s teachings on love. Kim argues that faith and love function as a guiding thematic pair in Luther’s view of Christ and the law in his 1535 commentary on Galatians. David C. Fink
135129 J.A. Linebaugh, “The Christo-Centrism of Faith in Christ: Martin Luther’s Reading of Galatians 2.16, 19–20”, New Testament Studies 59:4 (2013), pp. 535–544.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688513000210
(2015) explains how Luther’s interpretation of Galatians differs from that of earlier scholars such as Jerome, Augustine and Aquinas before him. In the same volume, John M.G. Barclay
136130 G. Hansen, “Luther’s Radical Conception of Faith: God, Christ, and Personhood in a Post-Metaphysical Age”, Dialog: A Journal of Theology 52:3 (2013), pp. 212–221.
https://doi.org/10.1111/dial.12046
(2015) discusses the appropriateness and relevance of Luther’s exegesis of Galatians even though it is true that he did not understand the focus of the letter altogether correctly. Samuel J. Dubbelman
137131 T. Wengert, “Martin Luther on Galatians 3:6–14: Justification by Curses and Blessings”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 91–116. See also earlier: T.J. Wengert, Reading the Bible with Martin
(2016) suggests that Luther borrowed the expression tenebra et caligo fidei (“the darkness and cloud of faith”, used in his 1535 commentary on Galatians) from Dionysius the Areopagite. Luther thus appropriated expressions associated with mystical theologians in order to explain the great difference between gospel and law. Enoch Ekyarikunda and Ernest van Eck
138
(Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2013), pp. 92–122. Luther: An Introductory Guide
(2016) wonder if it is possible for the Lutheran church in Uganda to understand the law in the same way as Luther did, since the situation in Uganda differs from that of Luther. They argue that the social and cultural context is very important for Christian living, as Galatians prove. Matthew Rosebrock
139132 D. Parry, “John Bunyan and Edwin Sandys on Luther’s Galatians Commentary”, Notes and Queries 61:3 (2014), pp. 377–380.
https://doi.org/10.1093/notesj/gju100
(2016) shows that the concepts oratio, meditatio and tentatio (“prayer”, “meditation” and “temptation”) are not only pivotal in Luther’s theology (as illustrated in his lectures on Galatians), but also had an influence on artistic manifestations of the Reformation, as is evident from some of the altarpieces created by Lucas Cranach the Elder. Aihe Zheng
140133 S. Hafemann, “Yaein: Yes and No to Luther’s Reading of Galatians 3:6–14”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 117–131. Updated version: S.J. Hafemann, Paul: Servant of the New Covenant: Pauline Polarities in Eschatological Perspective (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.435, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019), pp. 31–51.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157702-4
(2016) investigates Luther’s lectures on Galatians and Genesis (1535–1545) to determine what he taught about pastoral issues. According to Zheng, Luther used his views on law and gospel to encourage his students to live out their vocations faithfully. Evert Barten
141134 S.-y. Kim, Luther on Faith and Love: Christ and the Law in the 1535 Galatians Commentary (Emerging Scholars, Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press, 2014).
(2016) published a Dutch translation and an interpretation of Luther’s commentary on Galatians. Timothy Maschke
142135 D.C. Fink, “Martin Luther’s Reading of Galatians”, in: M. Allen and J.A. Linebaugh (eds.), Reformation Readings of Paul: Explorations in History and Exegesis (Downers Grove IL: IVP Academic, 2015), pp. 23–48.
(2017) discusses Luther’s comments on angelic mediators in Galatians 3, placing them in historical context. Anselmo Ernesto Graff and Evaldo Luis Pauly
143136 J.M.G. Barclay, “The Text of Galatians and the Theology of Luther”, in: M. Allen and J.A. Linebaugh (eds.), Reformation Readings of Paul: Explorations in History and Exegesis (Downers Grove IL: IVP Academic, 2015), pp. 49‑72.
(2017) identify a two-dimensional missiological structure in Luther’s lectures on Genesis and Galatians consisting of a vertical dimension (it is exclusively God’s work) and a horizontal dimension (it is the responsibility of believers). Dexter S. Maben
144137 S.J. Dubbelman, “The Darkness of Faith: A Study in Martin Luther’s 1535 Galatians Commentary”, Trinity Journal 37:2 (2016), pp. 213–232.
(2017) believes that the Lutheran Paul has to be “liberated”. This can be done by understanding the law by means of social dominance theory focusing on the social dimension of the law. Maben illustrates this by an interpretation of 3:6–20. Naomichi Masaki
145138 E. Ekyarikunda and E. van Eck, “Luther and the Law in the Lutheran Church of Uganda”, HTS Theological Studies 72:1 (2016), pp. 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v72i1.3251
(2017) is of the opinion that Luther’s lectures on Galatians (1531/1535) are rightly considered as the banner of the Reformation and provides reasons for such a view. Karl Olav Sandnes
146139 M. Rosebrock, “Luther’s Visual Theology: The Lectures on Galatians and Cranach’s Law and Gospel Paintings”, Concordia Journal 42:4 (2016), pp. 332–339.
(2017) focuses on Luther’s exegesis of Galatians (1535) in light of recent developments, in particular the preamble and argumentum. Sandnes points out that Luther read the Bible (and Galatians) from the perspective of humanity’s most basic ideal, namely a quest for righteousness. Thomas Johann Bauer
147140 A. Zheng, Law and Gospel in Martin Luther’s Pastoral Teachings as Seen in His Lecture Notes: Finding Guidance in Genesis and Galatians to Serve the Household of God (Bern: Peter Lang, 2016).
https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-06912-9/1
(2018) notes that Luther’s commentary was one of the central documents of the Reformation, since he discovered in it the message of a gracious God. However, Bauer also shows how the New Perspective on Paul challenges Luther’s interpretation of Paul as well as Protestant theology. Stephen J. Chester
148141 E. Barten, Rechtvaardig door het Geloof: Luthers Verklaring van de Galatenbrief Uitgelegd (Houten: Den Hertog, 2016).
(2018) draws attention to the fact that Joseph Lortz and Jared Wickes – the two most important twentieth-century Roman Catholic scholars of Luther – have opposite views of his stance towards religious experience. Chester argues that these differences are caused by a polarity in Luther’s views in this regard, as can be seen from his exegesis of 4:6. Hyun-Gwang Kim
149142 T. Maschke, “Angelic Mediators: Luther’s Comments on Galatians 3 in Historical Context”, Concordia Theological Journal 4:2 (2017), pp. 27–42.
(2018) gives an overview of Luther’s interpretation of Galatians. Kim maintains that Luther’s views on justification by faith did not imply that good works had no value, since Luther stated that believers should demonstrate both faith and works. Haraldo S. Camacho
150143 A.E. Graff and E.L. Pauly, “A Estrutura Teológica Missionária Bidimensional de Lutero: Preleções Sobre Gênesis e Gálatas”, Caminhos 15:2 (2017), pp. 342–353.
https://doi.org/10.18224/cam.v15i2.5726
(2018) published a translation of Luther’s commentary on Galatians (1535) in today’s English. Jonathan A. Linebaugh
151144 D.S. Maben, “‘Why Then the Law?’ Pauline Ecclesiology and Interfaith Relations”, Bangalore Theological Forum 49:1 (2017), pp. 102–116.
(2020) discusses the “I” in 2:20 in dialogue with Luther. Linebaugh argues that the no longer living “I” and the now living “I” are not identical: the second “I” is in the first “I” as a gift, even though the second “I” is also the first “I” that was loved by Christ. Samuel J. Youngs
152145 N. Masaki, “In Search of Celebrating the Reformation Rightly: Luther’s Lectures on Galatians (1531/1535) as the Banner of the Reformation”, Concordia Theological Quarterly 81:3/4 (2017), pp. 213–238.
(2020) develops a psychological paradigm of the cross in dialogue with Luther’s commentary on Galatians (1531/1535): Luther’s focus was on the inner and the affective world of believers, i.e., it was a form of “therapeutic atonement”. Miikka Ruokanen
153146 K.O. Sandnes, “Luther, Galaterbrevet og Moderne Paulus-Forskning”, Teologisk Tidsskrift 6:1 (2017), pp. 7–24.
https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1893-0271-2017-01-02
(2020) criticises Mannermaa’s interpretation of Luther’s lectures on Galatians. According to Ruokanen, Mannermaa overlooks the role of the Spirit in justification, undervalues aspects such as atonement and reconciliation in Luther’s view of justification, and ignores the role of the Spirit in the union between God and sinners. Kalina Wojciechowska
154147 T.J. Bauer, “The Letter to the Galatians and the Concerns of Reformation: Luther’s Interpretation and Recent Discussions on Pauline Theology”, Theoforum 48:1/2 (2018), pp. 115–126.
https://doi.org/10.2143/tf.48.1.3286632
(2020) discusses justification in the light of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification and Luther’s commentaries on Romans (1516) and Galatians (1535), showing the differences and similarities between Luther’s views and those found in the declaration.
3.3 John Calvin
Riemer A. Faber
155148 S.J. Chester, “‘Abba! Father!’ (Galatians 4:6): Justification and Assurance in Martin Luther’s Lectures on Galatians (1535)”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 15–28. For a response to Chester’s contribution, see: P.J. Leithart, “Response: Galatians Five Hundred Years Later”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 63–71.
(2004) explains the influence that Erasmus’s Novum Testamentum and Annotationes had on Calvin’s Galatians’s commentary. Faber shows that Calvin made use of Erasmus’s text and Annotationes but that there was a theological difference between the two: Calvin focused on the difference between justification by works and by faith, whereas Erasmus focused on the difference between ceremony and grace. Peter Ward
156149 H.-G. Kim, “A Study of Luther’s Understanding of Galatians”, 한국개혁신학 60 (2018), pp. 235–263.
(2005) explains the way in which doctrine influenced Calvin’s preaching by investigating some of his sermons, amongst others, from Galatians. Ward also notes that Calvin’s preaching was both affective and didactic. J. Mark Beach
157150 H.S. Camacho (transl.), Martin Luther’s Commentary on Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians (1535): Lecture Notes Transcribed by Students & Presented in Today’s English (Irvine CA: 1517 Publishing, 2018).
(2009) discusses Calvin’s interpretation of 3:15–22 and other key texts and its implication for membership of the covenant of grace. Beach maintains that it is necessary to accept the dual aspect of covenant membership to remain true to Scripture. One of the passages that Barbara Pitkin
158151 J.A. Linebaugh, “‘The Speech of the Dead’: Identifying the No Longer and Now Living ‘I’ of Galatians 2.20”, New Testament Studies 66:1 (2020), pp. 87–105.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0028688519000365
(2009) discusses in an essay on Calvin’s reception of Paul is Galatians 2. Pitkin shows that Calvin’s reading of Paul was a polemical reading (Paul was used as argument against Roman Catholic views of justification) and a canonical one (Galatians was read in terms of other parts of Scripture). Jeannette Kreijkes-van Esch
159152 S.J. Youngs, “‘Therapeutic’ Atonement? A Psychological Paradigm of the Cross in Dialogue with Martin Luther”, Anglican Theological Review 102:3 (2020), pp. 393–415.
(2017) explains the impact that certain theological concepts had on Calvin’s reception of Chrysostom by looking at Calvin’s exegesis of 4:21–26. It is evident that an emphasis on the sensus literalis (“literal sense”) does not necessarily prevent one from reading one’s own theology into the text. J. Andrew Cohan
160153 M. Ruokanen, “Remarks on Tuomo Mannermaa’s Interpretation of Martin Luther’s Lectures on Galatians”, 国学与西学 国际学刊 18 (2020), pp. 39–63.
(2018) challenges the commonly accepted view that 2:17 is not directly related to vv. 19–20 by drawing attention to Calvin’s interpretation: Calvin read v. 20 as referring not to Christ’s indwelling in believers but to God’s acceptance of them in Christ. Accordingly, Cowan proposes that vv. 19–20 should be seen as a reference to the justifying relationship mentioned in v. 17.
3.4 Reformation period (general)
According to S.M. Baugh
161154 K. Wojciechowska, “‘Łaską … przez Wiarę’ – Lutra Koncepcja Usprawiedliwienia Grzesznika: Perspektywa Egzegetyczno-Hermeneutyczna”, Roczniki Teologiczne 67:7 (2020), pp. 85–109.
https://doi.org/10.18290/rt20677-6
(2004), 3:20 supports the Reformed view of the pactum salutis, the covenant of redemption, in particular the idea of an intratinitarian arrangement, something that Moses could not mediate, since God is one. Juha Mikkonen
162155 R.A. Faber, “The Influence of Erasmus’s ‘Annotationes’ on Calvin’s Galatians Commentary”, Nederlands Archief voor Kerkgeschiedenis 84 (2004), pp. 268–283.
(2007) offers a comparison of substantial concepts in Luther’s and Cavin’s commentaries on Galatians. Mikkonen concludes that, although Calvin’s commentary is not dependent on that of Luther, the two commentaries basically arrive at similar positions. Mikkonen also notes several differences between the two commentaries, e.g., the fact that one’s suffering as a Christian and the scandal of the cross are significant themes only in Luther’s commentary. One of the issues that Irene Backus
163156 P. Ward, “Coming to Sermon: The Practice of Doctrine in the Preaching of John Calvin”, Scottish Journal of Theology 58:3 (2005), pp. 319–332.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0036930605001419
(2009) uses to illustrate Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples’s interpretation of Paul is 2:11–12 (the conflict between Paul and Peter). Backus describes his interpretation as idiosyncratic and dominated by a refusal to challenge church tradition about the two apostles. In the light of criticism raised by the New Perspective on Paul against the way in which the Reformed tradition read Paul, Stephen Chester
164157 J.M. Beach, “Calvin and the Dual Aspect of Covenant Membership: Galatians 3:15–22 – The Meaning of the ‘“Seed” Is Christ’ – and Other Key Texts”, Mid-America Journal of Theology 20 (2009), pp. 49–73.
(2008) discusses the way in which Erasmus and the Reformers interpreted 2:16, in particular the expression “works of the law”, the notion of justification by faith and the expression “faith in Christ”/“the faithfulness of Christ”. One of the issues that Hermann Ehmer
165158 B. Pitkin, “Calvin’s Reception of Paul”, in: R.W. Holder (ed.), A Companion to Paul in the Reformation (Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 15, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 267–296.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004174924.i-660.50
See also: B. Pitkin, Calvin, the Bible, and History: Exegesis and Historical Reflection in the Era of Reform (Oxford/New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2020), pp. 36–67.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190093273.001.0001
(2009) discusses in an essay on Johannes Brenz and Paul, is his commentary on Galatians. According to Ehmer, Brenz published his commentary after that of Luther, since he wanted to show that he regarded Luther as his teacher and an organ of God. R. Scott Clark
166159 J. Kreijkes-van Esch, “Sola Scriptura and Calvin’s Appeal to Chrysostom’s Exegesis”, in: H. Burger, A. Huijgen and E. Peels (eds.), Sola Scriptura: Biblical and Theological Perspectives on Scripture, Authority, and Hermeneutics (Studies in Reformed Theology 32, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017), pp. 260–275.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004356436_016
See also earlier: J. Kreijkes, “The Impact of Theological Concepts on Calvin’s Reception of Chrysostom’s Exegesis of Galatians 4:21–6”, Studia Patristica 96 (2017), pp. 57–63.
(2009) gives an overview of Caspar Olevianus’s Pauline commentaries, the first of which to be published being the one on Galatians. Clark draws attention to the fact that Olevianus summarised the message of Galatians as righteousness from the gospel and not from the law – a programmatic summary not only of his theology but also of the hermeneutic according to which he interpreted all the Pauline letters. In an overview of the way in which Paul was interpreted by Johannes Bugenhagen in order to substantiate the importance of care for the poor in the sixteenth century, Kurt K. Hendel
167160 J.A. Cowan, “The Legal Significance of Christ’s Risen Life: Union with Christ and Justification in Galatians 2.17–20”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 40:4 (2018), pp. 453–472.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064x18767078
Jan Lambrecht does not agree with this proposal. See: J. Lambrecht, Intended Sense of Scripture: Fifty Brief Exegetical Notes (2019–2020) (Beau Basin: Scholars’ Press, 2020), pp. 269–273.
(2009) refers to several texts from the Pauline corpus that Bugenhagen regarded as important for this purpose. In the case of Galatians, 2:10 and 6:10 are highlighted. S.J. Oh
168161 S.M. Baugh, “Galatians 3:20 and the Covenant of Redemption”, The Westminster Theological Journal 66:1 (2004), pp. 49–70.
(2010) compares the views of Calvin and Luther on the law in their commentaries on Galatians and argues that Luther focused more on the grace of God than Calvin did, and thus Luther gave a better explanation of Paul’s views. The Reformation Commentary on Scripture series contains extracts from the Reformers, illustrating how they interpreted Scripture. Galatians and Ephesians are treated in volume 10, edited by Gerald L. Bray
169162 J. Mikkonen, Luther and Calvin on Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians: An Analysis and Comparison of Substantial Concepts in Luther’s 1531/35 and Calvin’s 1546/48 Commentaries on Galatians (Ǻbo: Ǻbo Akademis Förlag, 2007).
(2011). Michael Morson
170163 I. Backus, “Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples: A Humanist or a Reformist View of Paul and His Theology?”, in: R.W. Holder (ed.), A Companion to Paul in the Reformation (Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 15, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 213–240.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004174924.i-660.12
(2012) defends the interpretation of the expression “works of the law” by Luther and Calvin as “good works” against criticism by the New Perspective. Morson finds Luther’s and Calvin’s interpretations of the expression exegetically good and pastorally useful. The Reformation Heritage Bible Commentary contains extracts from commentators from the Lutheran heritage. The volume on Galatians, Ephesians and Philippians was prepared by Jerald C. Joersz
171164 S. Chester, “When the Old Was New: Reformation Perspectives on Galatians 2:16”, The Expository Times 119:7 (2008), pp. 320–329.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014524608091090
(2013). A new historical-critically edited version of Heinrich Bullinger’s works is being published. The volume containing his commentary on Galatians was published in 2014 and edited by Luca Baschera.
172165 H. Ehmer, “Brenz and Paul”, in: R.W. Holder (ed.), A Companion to Paul in the Reformation (Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 15, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 165–185.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004174924.i-660.26
Abraham van de Beek
173166 R.S. Clark, “The Reception of Paul in Heidelberg: The Pauline Commentaries of Caspar Olevianus”, in: R.W. Holder (ed.), A Companion to Paul in the Reformation (Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 15, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 297–315.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004174924.i-660.57
(2014) explores the reception of 2:20 by Patristic authors and by Luther and Calvin, showing that their interpretation of this verse often does not fit the theological frameworks in which later generations placed these authors. Stephen J. Chester
174167 K.K. Hendel, “Paul and the Care of the Poor During the Sixteenth Century: A Case Study”, in: R.W. Holder (ed.), A Companion to Paul in the Reformation (Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 15, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 541–571.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004174924.i-660.103
(2014) investigates Luther’s and Calvin’s view of human deeds in their exegesis of 5:6. Chester shows that for them “faith” was the key term in understanding Galatians. Although they believed that deeds could not justify, they still regarded deeds as integral to faith. Furthermore, they emphasised the sociological characteristics of love. Luca Baschera
175168 S.J. Oh, “A Comparison of the Views on the Law between Luther and Calvin in Their Commentaries on Galatians”, Korean New Testament Studies 17:3 (2010), pp. 657–709.
(2017) discusses the difference between Luther’s and Bullinger’s interpretation of 2:11–14: whereas Luther thought that Peter erred in terms of doctrine (“Lehrauffassung”), Bullinger was of the opinion that it was merely an instance of misconduct (“Fehlverhalten”). Samuel Vollenweider
176169 G.L. Bray (ed.), Galatians, Ephesians (Reformation Commentary on Scripture, New Testament 10, Downers Grove Il: IVP Academic, 2011).
(2017) uses examples from Galatians (1:1–9, 2:12–21 and 3:13) and Philippians to illustrate Bullinger’s interpretation of Paul. Vollenweider highlights two aspects: Bullinger followed Melanchthon’s rhetorical approach but in a milder way, and, furthermore, his hermeneutical approach was characterised by a focus on the scopus of Scripture and the way in which it could be organised in terms of loci. Jonathan A. Linebaugh
177170 M. Morson, “Reformed, Lutheran, and ‘New Perspective’: A Dialogue between Traditions Regarding the Interpretation of ‘Works of the Law’ in Galatians”, Canadian Theological Review 1:2 (2012), pp. 61–67.
(2018) identifies the “grammar of the gospel” in the Reformation as the expression of Paul’s view of justification in terms of an antithesis, indicating both what the gospel is and is not. Linebaugh applies this insight to Galatians, showing how this antithesis functions as a critical hermeneutical criterion in the letter.
3.5 Other studies
Maria Isabel Barbeito Carneiro
178171 J.C. Joersz, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians (Reformation Heritage Bible Commentary, Saint Louis MO: Concordia, 2013).
(2007) gives an overview of the way in which Songs of Songs and Galatians were appropriated for understanding union and transformation of the soul in God by some Franciscans and Carmelites during the Early Modern Era: Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Cecilia del Nacimiento, Antonio Sobrino and Estefanía de la Encarnación. Adam McClendon
179172 L. Baschera (ed.), Heinrich Bullinger Kommentare zu den neutestamentlichen Briefe: Gal – Eph – Phil – Kol (Dritte Abteilung: Theologische Schriften Band 7, Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, 2014).
(2011) discusses the way in which William Bridge, a Puritan minister, interpreted 2:20 in five sermons preached in 1648. For Bridge, this verse depicts a concise portrayal of the justification of the believer and the nature of the spiritual life flowing from this event. Debora Shuger
180173 A. van de Beek, “The Reception of Galatians 2:20 in the Patristic Period and the Reformation”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 19 (2014), pp. 42–57.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2s.3
(2012) edited a collection of primary sources from Early Stuart England, reflecting the variety in religion, theology and spirituality during this period. This book contains a sermon by John Hales on 6:7 (ca. 1619–38, published in 1660) in which Hales defends rationalism, individualism and egalitarianism. One of the sermons chosen by Jonathan M. Yeager
181174 S.J. Chester, “Faith Working through Love (Galatians 5:6): The Role of Human Deeds in Salvation in Luther and Calvin’s Exegesis”, The Covenant Quarterly 72:3/4 (2014), pp. 41–54.
(2013) to illustrate Early Evangelism is one on 6:14. In this sermon, John Maclaurin (1693–1754) emphasises that eternal salvation is only possible through the death of Jesus – a death that paradoxically both humiliated and glorified him. One of the examples that James P. Byrd
182175 L. Baschera, “Fehlverhalten oder Irrtum in der Lehre? Die Deutung des ‘Apostelstreites’ (Gal 2,11–14) und dessen Ursache bei Heinrich Bullinger und Martin Luther”, in: C. Christ-von Wedel and S. Grosse (eds.), Auslegung und Hermeneutik der Bibel in der Reformationszeit (Historia
(2013) selects to illustrate how American colonists used the Bible to justify the American Revolution is 5:1. Byrd shows how Paul’s call to liberty was used as a slogan and even rationale for political revolution, i.e., as claim of divine authority. Vladimir Brljak
183
pp. 243–264. Hermeneutica: Series Studia 14, Berlin/Boston MA: De Gruyter, 2017),
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110467925-010
(2015) believes that John Milton was familiar with the disputes surrounding 4:24 and that this helps one to understand his anti-allegorical stance, as is evident in his “Paradise Regain’d”. One of the examples that Daniel L. Dreisbach
184176 S. Vollenweider, “Paulus in Zürich: Zur Briefauslegung von Heinrich Bullinger”, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 114:1 (2017), pp. 1–20.
https://doi.org/10.1628/004435417X14822419363900
(2017) uses to illustrate the way in which the Bible was read by the “founding fathers” in the USA is 5:1. Dreisbach shows how this call to liberty was used and abused in the fight for political liberty. Claire Walker
185177 J.A. Linebaugh, “The Grammar of the Gospel: Justification as a Theological Criterion in the Reformation and in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, Scottish Journal of Theology 71:3 (2018), pp. 287–307.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0036930618000339
(2017) explains how Rev. Samuel Wesley used a rhetoric of shame in a sermon on 6:1, preached at two occasions (1719 and 1725) in order to admonish a parishioner as well as the rest of the parish for immorality. However, apparently Wesley did not practise what he preached, since at the time of the second preaching of the sermon, he and the rest of his family had not forgiven his own daughter who had eloped and returned to the family. Audrey Taschini
186178 M.I. Barbeito Carneiro, “En Él Fueron Transformadas”, Via Spiritus: Revista de História da Espiritualidade e do Sentimento Religioso 14 (2007), pp. 31–64.
(2017) discusses the way in which John Donne expands the clothing metaphor found in 3:27 in terms of fashion customs of his time in one of his sermons in order to convey a spiritual message. Nancy Carol James
187179 A. McClendon, “A Puritan’s Perspective of Galatians 2:20”, Puritan Reformed Journal 3:1 (2011), pp. 56–77.
(2017) published the first English translation of, and an introduction to, the French mystic Jeanne Guyon’s commentaries on Galatians, Ephesians and Colossians, with explanations and reflections for the interior life. Victor Nuovo
188180 D. Shuger (ed.), Religion in Early Stuart England, 1603–1638: An Anthology of Primary Sources (Documents of Anglophone Christianity Baylor TX: Baylor University Press, 2012), pp. 843–850.
(2019) describes John Locke’s hermeneutics of existence and the way in which he represented Christianity. One of the sources that Nuovo uses to illustrate Locke’s hermeneutical practices is his commentary on the Pauline letters (on Galatians, the Corinthian letters, Romans and Ephesians). According to Nuovo, for Locke, the recovery of the notion of revelation opened a philosophical way to transcendence. In the same volume, Henning Graf Reventlow
189181 J.M. Yeager (ed.), Early Evangelism: A Reader (Oxford/New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 178–184.
(2019) discusses Locke’s religious development, from his An Essay Concerning Human Understanding to his commentary on Paul’s letters. Kenneth P. Minkema, Adriaan C. Neele and Allen M. Stanton
190182 J.P. Byrd, Sacred Scripture, Sacred War: The Bible and the American Revolution (New York NY/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 116–142.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199843497.001.0001
(2019) published several sermons by Jonathan Edwards that have not been published before: on 2:17, 20, 3:13, 16, 5:6 and 17. Grace Magnier
191183 V. Brljak, “The Satanic ‘Or’: Milton and Protestant Anti-Allegorism”, The Review of English Studies 66:275 (2015), pp. 403–422.
https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgv011
(2020) elucidates how the views of Pedro de Valencia (1550–1620), a humanist and Biblical scholar who wrote a commentary on Acts and Galatians, were influenced by these two writings. De Valencia regarded the situation of the Moriscos in Spanish society of his time as similar to that of the Gentiles in the New Testament era. They thus also had to be treated with toleration, patience and love. Marlin E. Blaine
192184 D.L. Dreisbach, Reading the Bible with the Founding Fathers (New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2017), pp. 189–204.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199987931.001.0001
(2020) explains how Shakespeare brutally ironized the relationship between spirit, lust and will depicted in 5:16–26, in Sonnet 129.
4. The Nineteenth to the Twenty-First Centuries
4.1 The Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries
Martin HeideggerMatthias Fritsch and Jennifer Anna Gosetti-Ferencei
193185 C. Walker, “Governing Bodies, Family and Society: The Rhetoric of the Passions in the Sermons of Samuel Wesley”, English Studies 98:7 (2017), pp. 733–746.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0013838X.2017.1384228
(2004) published an English translation of (the young) Heidegger’s important lectures on the phenomenology of religion. Amongst other things, these lectures presented a phenomenological interpretation of Galatians and I & II Thessalonians. Carlos Casale
194186 A. Taschini, “The Christian Believer’s Spiritual Clothing in John Donne’s Comment of Galatians 3,27”, Elephant & Castle 16 (2017), pp. 5–16.
(2008) explains how Heidegger regarded Galatians and I & II Thessalonians as paradigms for realising factic life. Casale also offers a critical theological assessment of Heidegger’s contribution. In the same issue, Ignacio Chuecas
195187 N.C. James (transl. & ed.), Jeanne Guyon’s Christian Worldview: Her Biblical Commentaries on Galatians, Ephesians, and Colossians with Explanations and Reflections on the Interior Life (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2017).
(2008) re-analyses some of the Pauline concepts in Galatians (in particular, the relationship between faith and law) that play an important role in Heidegger’s discussion of the phenomenology of religious life, since Heidegger’s views on these matters reflect the academic insights from his era and there have been further developments since then. Paulo Sérgio Lopes Gonçalves
196188 V. Nuovo, “Locke’s Hermeneutics of Existence and His Representation of Christianity”, in: L. Simonutti (ed.), Locke and Biblical Hermeneutics: Conscience and Scripture (International Archives of the History of Ideas/Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Idées 226, Cham: Springer, 2019), pp. 77–104.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19903-6
(2012) discusses the way in which Heidegger analyses Christian religion, in particular from the perspective of phenomenology, hermeneutics and facticity. Gonçalves focuses in particular on Heidegger’s views in this regard on Galatians, I & II Thessalonians, Augustine’s Confessions (Book X) and medieval mysticism. Arthur Grupillo
197189 H.G. Reventlow, “The Religious Way of John Locke from the Essay to the Paraphrase (1690–1704)”, in: L. Simonutti (ed.), Locke and Biblical Hermeneutics: Conscience and Scripture (International Archives of the History of Ideas/Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Idées 226, Cham: Springer, 2019), pp. 11–20.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19903-6
(2014) highlights Heidegger’s views in The Phenomenology of Religious Life on why the Christian religion, and in particular the Pauline writings, offer an avenue to a philosophy of religion. Grupillo points out that Heidegger’s notion of the facticity of Christian living opposes a generally downward tendency in human experience of life. Josias da Costa Junior
198190 K.P. Minkema, A.C. Neele and A.M. Stanton (eds.), Sermons by Jonathan Edwards on the Epistle to the Galatians (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2019).
(2015) discusses Heidegger’s The Phenomenology of Religious Life, in particular the way in which he understands the notions of hermeneutics, phenomenology and facticity. Furthermore, the focus falls on mystical religious experience. Norman K. Swazo
199191 G. Magnier, “Pedro de Valencia: Christian Humanist, Biblical Scholar and Social Critic: Advocate for Gentle Treatment of the Moriscos”, Hispania Sacra 72:146 (2020), pp. 391–402.
https://doi.org/10.3989/hs.2020.027
(2019) draws attention to Heidegger’s interpretation of Galatians and points out that for Heidegger, faith as lived experience and recognising “the Christ” are essential. However, recognising him needs phenomenological clarification. Franceso Mora
200192 M.E. Blaine, “Lust, Spirit, and the Vice List in Shakespeare’s Sonnet 129 and Galatians 5”, Ben Jonson Journal 27:2 (2020), pp. 234–246.
https://doi.org/10.3366/bjj.2020.0286
(2020) investigates Heidegger’s views of factic life as explained in his investigations of Galatians and I & II Thessalonians. This highlights the importance of religion. Hyon Jin Im
201193 M. Fritsch and J.A. Gosetti-Ferencei (transls.), Martin Heidegger: The Phenomenology of Religious Life (Studies in Continental Thought, Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press, 2004), pp. 47–51.
(2020) offers a feminist phenomenological perspective on gender and indicates what it implies for artificial intelligence, based on the depiction of gender roles in Galatians and 1 Corinthians, as well as Heidegger’s views on Dasein. According to Gideon Baker
202194 C. Casale, “La Interpretación Fenomenológica de Heidegger de la Escatología Paulina”, Teología y Vida 49:3 (2008), pp. 399–429.
https://doi.org/10.4067/S0049-34492008000200013
(2020), Paul’s reduction of the dual commandment (love of God and the neighbour) to love of the neighbour in 5:13 and Romans 13:9 should be understood in terms of Paul’s messianic perspective on worldliness. Since Paul thinks of the neighbour as somebody living right next to us in this world, he reduces love of God to love of the neighbour. Baker also refers to the contributions of Heidegger and Agamben in this regard.OtherDemetrius Williams
203195 I. Chuecas, “Heidegger y San Pablo: La Interpretación Fenomenológica de Martin Heidegger a la Carta a los Gálatas desde una Perspectiva de Exégesis Bíblica”, Teologia y Vida 49:3 (2008), pp. 431–445.
https://doi.org/10.4067/S0049-34492008000200014
(2003) offers an overview of the way in which 3:28 was appropriated in African American churches to fight against racism, sexism and classicism. Williams also points out that black churches sometimes failed to realise their own sexist practices. Heino Gaese
204196 P.S.L. Gonçalves, “A Religião à Luz da Fenomenologia Hermenêutica Heideggeriana”, Horizonte 10:26 (2012), pp. 566–583.
https://doi.org/10.5752/P.2175-5841.2012v10n26p566-583
(2003) published the Latin text, as well as a German translation of, and an introduction to, writings from Bengel’s well-known Gnomon that are relevant for the theme of justification, i.e., on Romans, Galatians, James and the Sermon on the Mount (from the 1835/36 edition). One of the texts that David W. Kling
205197 A. Grupillo, “Fenomenologia da Vida Religiosa: História e Método na Interpretação das Epístolas Paulinas do Jovem Heidegger”, Numen: Revista de Estudos e Pesquisa da Religião 17:2 (2014), pp. 73–97.
(2004) chooses to illustrate the interplay between the Bible and society is 3:28. In this instance, the issue that receives attention is the important role that this text played in the advocacy for women’s ministry and ordination. Samuel Fernández
206198 J. da Costa Junior, “Experiência Religiosa Mística a Partir de Martin Heidegger”, Revista de Estudos e Pesquisa da Religião 18:2 (2015), pp. 55‑71.
(2005) analyses the way in which Alberto Hurtado, a Jesuit saint, interpreted 2:20. According to Fernández, Hurtado’s interpretation of this verse (the verse that he cites most in his writings) helps one to understand his spirituality: the notion of being in Christ was integrated with that of Christ in others, especially the poor. Letty M. Russell
207199 N.K. Swazo, “Heidegger’s Destruktion of Theology: ‘Primordial Faith’ and ‘Recognition’ of the Messiah”, Modern Theology 35:1 (2019), pp. 138–162.
https://doi.org/10.1111/moth.12447
(2006) offers an overview of the way in which 4:21–31 has been interpreted by male scholars as well as by female scholars following a feminist and postcolonial approach, thus noting the “twists and turns” both in Paul’s allegory and the way in which it has been interpreted. Ida Raming
208200 F. Mora, “La Vita Fattiva nell’Esperienza del Protocristianesimo”, Bollettino Filosofico 35 (2020), pp. 213–226.
https://doi.org/10.6093/1593-7178/7449
(2006) offers an overview of the way in which 3:27 was interpreted in Vatican documents to exclude women in the Name of God in the era from Pope Pius XII until Pope Benedict XVI. Waldecir Gonzaga
209201 H.J. Im, “A Feminist Phenomenological Study on Artificial ‘Female’ Intelligence and Technocapitalism”, 신학과 사회 34:1 (2020), pp. 89–127.
https://doi.org/10.22748/thesoc.2020.34.1.004
(2007) assesses how 2:1–21 has been interpreted since Vatican II in order to obtain an in-depth understanding of the text and to work out the ecumenical and pastoral implications of such an understanding. James W. Thompson
210202 G. Baker, “Paul’s Reduction of the Dual Commandment: The Significance of Worldliness to Messianic Life”, Political Theology 21:7 (2020), pp. 606–622.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1462317x.2020.1787603
(2008) critically discusses the manner in which the law is perceived in the Stone-Campbell movement in the light of Paul’s views of the law (as, amongst others, reflected in Galatians). Thompson believes that Campbell and those who followed him did not realise the abiding significance of the law. Charles H. Cosgrove
211203 D. Williams, “African American Churches and Galatians 3:28: A Brief Assessment of the Appropriation of an Egalitarian Paradigm”, in: S. Matthews, C.B. Kittredge and M. Johnson-Debaufre (eds.), Walk in the Ways of Wisdom: Essays in Honor of Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza (Harrisburg PA/London/New York NY: Trinity Press International, 2003), pp. 351–369.
(2010) offers an overview of scholarly interpretations of Paul’s idea of ethnicity and also of the way in which 3:28 was interpreted in this regard. Pierre Debergé
212204 H. Gaese (transl.), Johann Albrecht Bengel: Der Gnomon: Lateinisch-deutsche Teilausgabe der Hauptschriften zur Rechtfertigung: Römer-, Galater-, Jakobusbrief und Bergpredigt nach dem Druck von 1835/36: Hrsg. und übers. von Heino Gaese (Tübingen/Basel: Francke, 2003).
(2011) illustrates how Simon Légasse understood the Pauline writings by discussing his interpretation of 2:16, 2:19–20 and 5:6b. According to Debergé, Légasse succeeded in combining exegetical rigour and theological depth in order to identify the contours of Christian living. Stephen J. Lennox
213205 D.W. Kling, The Bible in History: How the Texts Have Shaped the Times (New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 269–308.
https://doi.org/10.1093/0195130081.001.0001
(2012) explains the manner in which 3:28 was used in the US in the Holiness Movement during the antebellum period. Lennox argues that it could be used in this movement as a leading verse in the fight for the liberation of women, because of the emphasis in this group on “principles”. One of the examples that Paul R. Abramson
214206 S. Fernández, “‘Ya no vivo Yo, es Cristo que Vive en Mí’ (Gál 2,20): ‘Ser Cristo’ Como Clave de la Vida del Padre Alberto Hurtado”, Teología y Vida 46:3 (2005), pp. 352–373.
https://doi.org/10.4067/S0049-34492005000200003
(2012) uses to illustrate the influence that the Bible had on politics comes from 3:26–29. Abramson explains how this passage was used in the discussions about slavery in the US, both for and against abolition. Brendan Byrne
215207 L.M. Russell, “Twists and Turns in Paul’s Allegory”, in: P. Trible and L.M. Russell (eds.), Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives (Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox, 2006), pp. 71–97.
(2014) rejects J. Louis Martyn’s interpretation of the two covenants in 4:21–5:1 (traditionally interpreted as a reference to Judaism and Christianity) as referring to Paul’s opponents and Paul’s law-free mission to the Gentiles respectively. Byrne defends the traditional interpretation but also points out that it does not necessarily imply an anti-Jewish interpretation of the text. Darren O. Sumner
216208 I. Raming, Gleichrangig in Christus anstatt: Ausschluss von Frauen “im Namen Gottes”: Zur Rezeption und Interpretation von Gal 3,27f in vatikanischen Dokumenten (Theologische Plädoyers 1, Berlin: LIT Verlag, 2006).
(2014) considers Karl Barth’s interpretation of 4:4, in particular from the perspective of classical trinitarianism and Barth’s critical thoughts on the matter as they bear upon the issue of how human temporality relates to divine eternity. Matthias Grebe
217209 W. Gonzaga, “A Verdade do Evangelho” (Gl 2,5.14) e a Autoridade na Igreja: Gl 2,1–21 na Exegese do Vaticano II Até os Nossos Dias: História, Balanço e Novas Perspectivas (Tesi Gregoriana: Teologia 145, Rome: Editrice Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 2007).
(2015) discusses 3:13 in conversation with Barth, offering a fresh interpretation: Paul makes this provocative statement to silence his opponents in Galatia, and it implies that all humanity (and not the Father as Barth maintains) judged Christ. Joel Marcus
218210 J.W. Thompson, “Paul’s Doctrine of the Law and the Stone-Campbell Movement”, Restoration Quarterly 50:2 (2008), pp. 79–89.
(2017) looks critically at Martyn’s exegesis of 4:21‑31 (that it does not refer to Judaism and Christianity but to the law-free mission and the law-obedient mission) and finds it indefensible. Claus Bernet and Klaus Fuchs-Kittowski
219211 C.H. Cosgrove, “Paul and Ethnicity: A Selective History of Interpretation”, in: M.D. Given (ed.), Paul Unbound: Other Perspectives on the Apostle (Peabody MA/Edinburgh: Hendrickson, 2010), pp. 71–98.
(2018) edited and published the exegesis of Emil Fuchs on the Thessalonian letters, Galatians and the Corinthian letters. Fuchs worked on this from 1944–1945 under very pressing circumstances in Germany when it was already clear that Nazism would not last. Sheila Delany
220212 P. Debergé, “Le père Simon Légasse: Quand rigueur exégétique et profondeur théologique, à la suite de Paul, dessinent les contours de la vie chrètienne”, Bulletin de Littérature Ecclésiastique 112:1 (2011), pp. 5–16.
(2020) published an English translation of Sylvain Maréchal’s Pour et contre la Bible – a commentary originally published in 1801 by Maréchal. The commentary was a secularised and rationalist attempt to protest against the advent of Napoleon and a growth in Catholic enthusiasm. To conclude this section, the contributions of Khiok-khng Yeo, who focuses on the intercultural reading of Confucius and Galatians, should be mentioned. In a study published in 2005, Yeo
221213 S.J. Lennox, “‘One in Christ’: Galatians 3:28 and the Holiness Agenda”, The Evangelical Quarterly 84:3 (2012), pp. 195–212.
compares li in The Analects and the law in Galatians, drawing out the implications of li and the law for contemporary society. Yeo suggests that the common good is the goal of living by li and the law. In a second study, Yeo
222214 P.R. Abramson, Politics in the Bible (New Brunswick NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2012), pp. 148–151.
(2006) compares the concepts of xin (trust) in Confucius and pistis in Paul and demonstrates how Confucius might help one to interpret Paul. In a third contribution, Yeo
223215 B. Byrne, “Jerusalems Above and Below: A Critique of J.L. Martyn’s Interpretation of the Hagar-Sarah Allegory in Gal 4.21–5.1”, New Testament Studies 60:2 (2014), pp. 215–231.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688513000362
(2006) uses an intertextual reading of Confucius and Galatians for constructing a Chinese Christian identity. According to Yeo, Christ fulfils Confucian ethics, protects China from the anomalies of Western Christian history and protects the universal church from the anomalies of Chinese history. In a fourth contribution, Yeo
224216 D.O. Sumner, “Karl Barth and ‘The Fullness of Time’: Eternity and Divine Intent in the Epistle to the Galatians”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 249–257.
(2009) investigates the theme of moral freedom and human nature in Confucius and Galatians. According to Yeo, there is widespread agreement between Paul and Confucius, but Christ broadens or adds what is absent or implicit in Confucius, and Confucius stresses aspects of Christian belief that are underplayed by Western Christians. In a book published in 2008, Yeo
225217 M. Grebe, “Jesus Christ: Victim or Victor? Revisiting Galatians 3:13 in Conversation with Karl Barth and Scripture”, Communio Viatorum 57:3 (2015), pp. 240–251. Originally published as: M. Grebe, “Jesus Christ: Victim or Victor? Revisiting Galatians 3:13 in Conversation with Karl Barth and Scripture”, in: H.C. Kim (ed.), Galatians as Examined by Diverse Academics in 2012 (St. Andrews, Scotland) (Hermit Kingdom Studies in Christianity and Judaism 3, Highland Park: The Hermit Kingdom Press, 2013), pp. 28–41.
gathers the insights from nearly two decades of cross-cultural interpretation of The Analects and Pauline literature, in particular, Galatians. Yeo maintains that it is possible to be both Chinese and Christian, i.e., to be a Chinese Christian. Yeo also demonstrates how one can integrate insights from the Confucian tradition and from Paul on issues such as virtue ethics, violence, political ethics and being human in a world full of difference.
4.2 Studies addressing contemporary situations
Frank J. Matera
226218 J. Marcus, “Lou Martyn, Paul, and Judaism”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 7:1/2 (2017), pp. 112–118.
https://doi.org/10.5325/jstudpaullett.7.1-2.0112
(2000) explains how Paul developed his views on justification as a result of a twofold problem in the congregations in Galatians: a theological problem (Does righteousness depend on something else in addition to the Christ event?) and a social problem (Could Gentiles share a table with Jews without adopting Jewish ways?). Matera also works out the implications of Paul’s views in the letter for ecumenical dialogue. Eliud Wabukala and Grant LeMarquand
227219 C. Bernet and K. Fuchs-Kittowski (eds.), Emil Fuchs: Der erste Brief des Paulus an die Thessalonicher, Galaterbrief und Korintherbrief: Eine
(2000) appropriate 3:13 within an African context. They note that both first-century Jews and the Babukusu people connect hanging on a tree with the notion of curse. However, Paul interpreted Christ’s hanging on a cross as bringing blessing to believers and this logic of sacrifice enabled Babukusu believers to regard the cross as a sign of blessing. Patrick Kéchichian, Stanislas Breton and Philippe Morel
228
(1944–1945) (THEOS 138, Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovač, 2018).Auslegung des Evangeliums im Kontext von Verfolgung und Widerstand
(2001), respectively a writer, an exegete and an art historian, reflect on the depiction of Paul’s conversion in 1:11–23. Kéchichian focuses on spiritual aspects, Breton ponders the decisive events depicted here and Morel discusses four paintings relevant to the theme. Michael McGhee
229220 S. Delany, For and against the Bible: A Translation of Sylvain Maréchal’s Pour et contre la Bible (1801) (Studies in Critical Research on Religion 11, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2020).
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004435001
(2002) argues that finding commonalities between different religions may be deceptive. Although 6:10 and a passage from the Buddhist Mahavagga may sound the same, one should rather look at how things are understood and practised. Without this perspective, interfaith dialogue will remain shallow. Timothy Wiarda
230221 K.-K. Yeo, “Li and Law in the Analects and Galatians: A Chinese Christian Understanding of Ritual and Property”, The Asia Journal of Theology 19:2 (2005), pp. 309–332. See also the reprint of a work originally published in 1998: K.-K. Yeo, What Has Jerusalem to do with Beijing? Biblical Interpretation from a Chinese Perspective (Contrapuntal Readings of the Bible in World Christianity 2, Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2018).
(2003) identifies and critically assesses five different ways in which people use the Jerusalem Council as a model for the contemporary church. Wiarda concludes the investigation by emphasising the importance of sticking to the ideal of like-mindedness in the church. Álvaro Michelín Salomón
231222 K.-K. Yeo, “On Confucian xin and Pauline pistis”, Sino-Christian Studies 2 (2006), pp. 25–51.
(2004) draws attention to the importance of the ethical guidelines in 5:22–23 for believers in our time: Paul does not distinguish between ecclesial and secular life; everything must be a manifestation of Christ and the Spirit. Haringke Fugmann
232223 K.-K. Yeo, “Musing with Confucius (the Analects) and Paul (Galatians) on a ‘Theological-Cultural’ Chinese Journey”, The Asia Journal of Theology 20:2 (2006), pp. 385–398.
(2004) follows an inter-cultural approach by discussing the interpretation of Matthew 17:14–21 and Galatians 5:2–6 by pastors in Papua Guinea in an attempt to gain new insights for interpreting the two texts. For example, in the case of Galatians, Fugmann points out the importance of understanding the crisis reflected in the letter from the perspective of Paul’s opponents. On the basis of 3:28, Demetrius K. Williams
233224 K.-K. Yeo, “An Intertextual Reading of Moral Freedom in the Analects and Galatians”, in: S.E. Porter and M.J. Boda (eds.), Translating the New Testament: Text, Translation, Theology (McMaster New Testament Studies, Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2009), pp. 271–289.
(2004) argues that African American churches should advocate sexual equality with the same fervour as they fought against racism. In particular, African American churches should look critically at their attitudes and practices regarding women in ministry. Johann-Albrecht Meylahn
234225 K.-K. Yeo, Musing with Confucius and Paul: Toward a Chinese Christian Theology (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2008), pp. 53–109.
(2005) uses the concept of freedom in Christ as depicted in Galatians (an eschatological liberty of calling and promise) to help people handle the immense ethical challenges posed by postmodernity. Cilliers Breytenbach
235226 F.J. Matera, “Galatians and the Development of Paul’s Teaching on Justification”, Word & World 20:3 (2000), pp. 239–248.
(2006) reflects on Bernard C. Lategan’s interpretation of Galatians in South Arica during the phase when the apartheid started to crumble. Peter Mageto
236227 E. Wabukala and G. LeMarquand, “Cursed Be Everyone Who Hangs on a Tree: Pastoral Implications of Deuteronomy 21:22–23 and Galatians 3:13 in an African Context”, in: G. West and M. Dube (eds.), The Bible in Africa: Transactions, Trajectories, and Trends (Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2000), pp. 350–359.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004497108_024
(2006) highlights the ethics of a shared responsibility underlying 5:13–15 and points out the implication for churches in our time. This type of ethics provides believers with a model for Christian unity where different groups can be enriched by other groups. In an analysis of 1:11–24, Elvis Elengabeka
237228 P. Kéchichian, S. Breton and P. Morel, La conversion de Paul (Collection Triptyque, Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 2001).
(2007) draws attention to the way in which charismatic initiative and institutional regulation worked in synergy. For current missionaries, this shows that trust in an institution and faithfulness to the Spirit are both important. They should thus cultivate their personal creativity but also always be open for inputs from the side of the institution. On the basis of 6:10, Kjetil Fretheim
238229 M. McGhee, “Editorial: Greeks, Galatians and Western Buddhists: Christianity, Buddhism, and ‘Social Responsibility’”, Contemporary Buddhism: An Interdisciplinary Journal 3:2 (2002), pp. 99–109.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14639940208573760
(2008) argues that one should view Christian ethics as a communitarian type of ethics and that it should be guided by a preference for poor people. Laura J. Hunt
239230 T. Wiarda, “The Jerusalem Council and the Theological Task”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 46:2 (2003), pp. 233–248.
(2008) draws attention to the tension between Paul’s distance from and indebtedness to Jerusalem in 1:18–24 and appropriates this for the American context by raising the question of whether American Christians are not over-identifying with their own version of Christianity. In a study of Paul’s view of “neither Jew nor Greek” in 3:28, Bernard Ukwuegbu
240231 Á. Michelín Salomón, “El Fruto del Espíritu: Acerca de la Carta a los Gálatas”, Cuadernos de Teología 23 (2004), pp. 31–43.
(2008) pleads for a distinctive African theology of tolerance and mutual respect in church and society. In the light of 5:2 and 13, Burchell K. Taylor
241232 H. Fugmann, Berge versetzen: Interkulturelle Hermeneutik von Mt 17,14–21 und Gal 5,2–6 in Papua-Neuguinea (Beiträge zum Verstehen der Bibel, Münster: LIT Verlag, 2004).
(2008) argues that freedom is both a gift and a demand. Taylor appropriates this as follows: although the slave trade has been abolished, other unjust systems still impact negatively on the descendants of slaves and the church therefore has to continue the fight for true freedom. J.W. Maris
242233 D.K. Williams, An End to This Strife: The Politics of Gender in African American Churches (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2004).
(2008) focuses on the missionary task of the church, in particular in the light of the fact that the heavenly Jerusalem is called “mother” in 4:26. Maris believes that the church cannot claim these heavenly qualities directly. It should rather use the mother image to view itself critically and to focus on mission. Richard Liong-Seng Phua
243234 J.-A. Meylahn, “Called into the Freedom of Christ in a Postmodern Age and the Moral Debate”, Verbum et Ecclesia 26:3 (2005), pp. 740–755.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ve.v26i3.248
(2008) contends that 3:28 implies that the Bi-Annual Congress of Chinese Biblical Scholars is wrong to have required being an ethnic Chinese as a criterion for membership or attendance of the meeting. J. Nelson Jennings
244235 C. Breytenbach, “‘Not According to Human Criteria’: Bernard Lategan’s Reading of Galatians in a Crumbling Apartheid State”, in: C. Breytenbach, J.C. Thom and J. Punt (eds.), The New Testament Interpreted: Essays in Honour of Bernard C. Lategan (Novum Testamentum Supplements 124, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2006), pp. 53–67.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047410591_004
See also: B.C. Lategan, “Reading
(2009) offers a fresh reading of Romans and Galatians in Japan. Jennings stresses that Paul regarded the church as the covenant people of God, transcending single cultures. For our times, this implies taking a multi-ethnic ecclesiology seriously so that the destructive impact of nation states may be counteracted. Kyung-Sik Hyun
245
Perspective”, in: I.R. Kitzberger (ed.), The Personal Voice in Biblical Interpretation (London: Routledge, 1998), pp. 128–141. the Letter to the Galatians from an Apartheid and a Post-Apartheid
(2009) is of the opinion that the gospel was inculturated in Galatia by means of the ethical behaviour of believers, by behaviour characterised by equality, love and freedom. Hyun appropriates this as follows for missionaries currently in Asia: They should have consensus on what the gospel entails and try to foster a culture characterised by equality, love and freedom. In a contribution on missiological perspectives in certain pericopes in Galatians, Bernard Y. Quarshie
246236 P. Mageto, “Toward an Ethic of Shared Responsibility in Galatians 5:13–15”, Evangelical Review of Theology 30:1 (2006), pp. 86–94.
(2009) stresses the importance of focusing on the crucified Christ, the vital role of preaching, the need for appreciating the vulnerability of both preachers and converts, as well as the importance of continuing one’s spiritual life in the Spirit. In a study of 4:1–7, Eric R. Naizer
247237 E. Elengabeka, “Paul en mission: Fidélité à l’Esprit et confiance à l’institution”, Spiritus (Revue d’Expériences et de Recherches Missionnaires) 187 (2007), pp. 155–164.
(2009) emphasises the importance of faith (as opposed to the law) and appropriates this notion for the current context. Believers should always be wary of falling into legalism. Even the good things they do may distort the emphasis on spiritual liberty found in Galatians. John T. Squires
248238 K. Fretheim, “Grums i Galaterbrevet: Om Kristen Etikk, Paulus og den Prioriterte Andre”, Tidsskrift for Teologi og Kirke 79:2 (2008), pp. 113–129.
https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1504-2952-2008-02-03
(2009) explains how 3:27–28 served as a driving force behind the commitment of the Uniting Church in Australia to multiculturalism and the ordination of women, as well as behind arguments supporting justice for indigenous people. David T. Ejenobo
249239 L.J. Hunt, “Where Do You Come From? Cultural Confusion in Galatia and the United States – Galatians 1:18–24”, Evangelical Journal 26:2 (2008), pp. 85–89.
(2009) investigates three passages in Paul’s letters (1 Corinthians 12:3; Galatians 2:20 and Romans 8:9), highlighting the importance of the mystical element in Paul’s view of the Spirit. This is appropriated for the African context: if this aspect is taught more often, the Christian religion will be accepted more readily. Angelika Magnes
250240 B. Ukwuegbu, “‘Neither Jew nor Greek’: The Church in Africa and the Quest for Self-Understanding in the Light of the Pauline Vision and Today’s Context of Cultural Pluralism”, International Journal for the Study of the Christian Church 8:4 (2008), pp. 305–318.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14742250802353768
(2010) draws attention to the fact that 4:21–31 has been interpreted in the past in an anti-Jewish fashion as indicating the removal of the Jewish nation as the primary salvation partner of God. However, Magnes points out that such a view is incorrect, since the pericope refers to a specific conflict in Galatia and does not address the relationship between Judaism and Christianity. Paba Nidhani de Andrado
251241 B.K. Taylor, “Abolished, but Not Destroyed: Freedom – Gift and Demand (Gal 5.2,13)”, Reformed World 58:1 (2008), pp. 30–35.
(2010) notes the polarisation found in the interpretation of 3:28 by feminists on the one hand and official Catholic documents on the other and suggests that the problems in interpretation could be minimised if a more nuanced understanding of the differences between female and male is developed. Moses-Valentine Afamefuna Chukwujekwu
252242 J.W. Maris, De Missie van een Moeder (Apeldoornse Studies 50, Apeldoorn: Theologische Universiteit, 2008).
(2010) reads Galatians from the perspective of the relationship between gospel, church, and culture, showing that the letter promotes the cultural autonomy of the people that are being evangelised but that it also enhances the notion of unity in diversity. This implies that the gospel can be appropriated in different ways in different cultures in our time. James O. Adeyanju
253243 R.L.-S. Phua, “Galatians 3:28, shalom, and Ethnic Chinese Biblical Scholars”, Sino-Christian Studies 5 (2008), pp. 39–66.
(2010) explains how Nigerian churches can play a role in the rebranding of Nigeria by taking the view of spirituality expressed in 5:16–18 seriously. This would help to turn around socio-economic and political problems in the country. Korbinian Schmidt
254244 J.N. Jennings, “Paul in Japan: A Fresh Reading of Romans and Galatians”, in: B.M. Howell and Z. Edwin (eds.), Power and Identity in the Global Church: Six Contemporary Cases (Pasadena CA: William Carey Library, 2009), pp. 27–54.
(2010) considers the implications of the New Perspective on Paul for a theology of the religions. Put in the words of 2:21 (adapted): “If justification comes through other religions, then Christ died for nothing”. For Schmidt, the theological challenge thus entails explaining how one can be in Christ without knowing him at all. John Mansford Prior
255245 K.-S. Hyun, “Inculturation of the Gospel in Galatians”, 한국기독교신학논총 63 (2009), pp. 57–76.
(2010) points out that 3:27–28 is mostly interpreted in a spiritualised way by minority Christian groups in Indonesia and argues that it is a missiological imperative to move to a social reading of the text so that its radical egalitarian claim may be manifested in South East Asian societies. Michael Knowles
256246 B.Y. Quarshie, “Paul and the Primal Substructure of Christianity: Missiological Reflections on the Epistle to the Galatians”, Journal of African Christian Thought 12:1 (2009), pp. 8–14.
(2011) notes that Christianity, Judaism and Islam are nowadays usually regarded as “Abrahamic religions”. However, Knowles contends that, in the light of Galatians, Islam should not be called an “Abrahamic” religion. According to Jakob Wöhrle
257247 E.R. Naizer, “The ‘Heir’ through Faith and the ‘Slave’ under the Law: Galatians 4:1–7”, Bangalore Theological Forum 41:2 (2009), pp. 198‑209.
(2011), Isaac and Ishmael are depicted in 4:21–31 and in Genesis 17 as unequal and even as contradictory brothers and thus one cannot speak of an “Abrahamic ecumenism” (“abrahamische Ökumene”) in the Biblical traditions. Nevertheless, these texts may still be of importance for the interreligious and intercultural dialogue for our time. Suny George Kunnel
258248 J.T. Squires, “Interpreting Galatians 3:27–28 in the Uniting Church: A Relational and Contextual Perspective”, Uniting Church Studies 15:2 (2009), pp. 11–23.
(2012) considers the implications of the notions of justification by faith in Galatians 2:15–16 and faith and works in James 2:14–26 for the current situation in India. According to Kunnel, both views represent the gospel, and this message should be reinterpreted in a context of cultural and religious pluralism. Both individual salvation and social liberation are thus needed. Ed Mackenzie
259249 D.T. Ejenobo, “The Mystical Element in Paul’s Theology of the Holy Spirit: An African Interpretation”, The Asia Journal of Theology 23:1 (2009), pp. 69–81.
(2012) points out that the Emerging Church emphasises three aspects in its attempt to contextualise the gospel: mystery, journey and conversation. However, such an approach differs from Paul’s missiological approach in Galatians, since he stresses the coherency of the gospel, the importance of conversion and the obligation to proclaim the gospel. Ruth Oluwakemi Oke
260250 A. Magnes, “‘Different Mothers, Births and Inheritances’: Die Rede von zwei Frauen in Gal 4,21–31”, in: I. Fischer and C. Heil (eds.), Geschlechterverhältnisse und Macht: Lebensformen in der Zeit des frühen Christentums (Exegese in unserer Zeit 21, Berlin: LIT Verlag, 2010), pp. 110–127.
(2012) offers an exegetical analysis of 3:26–28 in order to support the cause of women participating actively in government. Lisa M. Hess
261251 P.N. de Andrado, “A Pauline Paradigm of Partnership”, in: S. Ross, D. Irarrázabal and P. Murray (eds.), Ministries in the Church (Concilium 2010/1, London: SCM, 2010), pp. 65–75.
(2012) explains how four weeks of keeping a kosher home can change one’s perspective. Although herself a long-time Presbyterian, after such an experience, Hess found it difficult to accept Paul’s polemic in Galatians. David A deSilva
262252 M.-V.A. Chukwujekwu, “Gospel, Church and Cultures: Pauline Perspective in the Letter to the Galatians”, Bulletin of Ecumenical Theology 22 (2010), pp. 5–27.
(2013) illustrates how reading a text from various social locations, in this case by reading Galatians with believers from Sri Lanka, helps one to gain a more holistic interpretation of the text. According to G. Daan Cloete
263253 J.O. Adeyanju, “Christian Spirituality, Depicted in Galatians 5:16–18, as a Tool for Rebranding in Nigeria”, African Journal of Biblical Studies 28:1 (2010), pp. 84–101.
(2013), 2:15–21 and the Belhar Confession both reflect crucial periods of transformation in the history of the church. Cloete motivates this by looking at the crucial concepts that played a role in each of these. Marshall Welch
264254 K. Schmidt, “‘So wäre Christus vergeblich gestorben’ (Gal 2,21): Die ‘Neue Perspektive auf Paulus’ und ihre Bedeutung für die Systematische Theologie”, Studia Missionalia 59 (2010), pp. 213–230.
(2013) developed a curriculum based on 5:22–23 for helping Christian men to flourish spiritually. It was tested in practical situations and it was found that it can be used successfully by pastoral staff and lay leaders. George Mombi
265255 J.M. Prior, “Integration, Isolation or Deviation: Reading Galatians 3:27–28 in Indonesia Today”, Mission Studies 27:1 (2010), pp. 71–90.
https://doi.org/10.1163/157338310X497964
(2013) discusses the implications of Christ’s death according to Galatians for people from Melanasia who have animistic backgrounds and are thus more conscious of spiritual powers. Mombi stresses that Christ triumphed over all the evil forces, also over the ancestral spirits and the masalai. Taking Paul’s vision of unity in Galatians 3:28 as a point of departure (striving towards unity where ethnicity does not play a role), Hans Leander
266256 M. Knowles, “The Galatian Test: Is Islam an Abrahamic Religion?”, New Blackfriars 92:1039 (2011), pp. 318–321.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2005.2010.01403.x
(2014) suggests a Lutheran recontextualisation of Paul’s vision in post-Lutheran Sweden, in particular by being sensitive to issues surrounding differences in ethnicity. Rusmir
Mahmutćehajić
267257 J. Wöhrle, “Isaak und Ismael: Zum Verhältnis der beiden Abrahamsöhne nach Genesis 17 und Galater 4,21–31”, Evangelische Theologie 71:2 (2011), pp. 115–132.
https://doi.org/10.14315/evth-2011-71-2-115
(2014) offers meditations on relations between Muslims and Christians by focusing on Muhammed and Mary, the mother of Jesus. One of the meditations is devoted to Sarah and Hagar in the light of Paul’s allegory in 4:21–31. Mark W. Elliott
268258 S.G. Kunnel, “‘Faith and Works’ in James 2:14-26 and ‘Justification by Faith Alone’ in Galatians 2:15–16: A Relevant Debate for the Church in India Today”, Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 76:6 (2012), pp. 425–435.
(2014) argues that a new perspective on Judaism in Paul’s time does not necessarily imply an entire revision of the way in which justification is perceived in Reformation theology as long as one understands “faith” in such a way that it leaves room for Jesus as the Messiah. Thomas Söding
269259 E. Mackenzie, “Mission and the Emerging Church: Pauline Reflections on a New Kind of Missiology”, Missiology: An International Review 40:3 (2012), pp. 315–328.
https://doi.org/10.1177/009182961204000307
(2014) uses Galatians and Romans to illustrate how a dialogue in theological circles may work: although there are many similarities between the two letters, there are also significant differences, thus indicating that in oecumenical dialogue both approaches are necessary. In a study of the relationship between the truth of the gospel and the unity of the church in the Pauline letters (amongst others, Galatians 2:5 and 14) and the Johannine writings, Hans-Christian Kammler
270260 R.O. Oke, “We Are All Children of God! An Exegetical Analysis of Galatians 3:26–28 in Support of Women’s Participation in Active Governance”, in: J.K. Ayantayo, O.A. Dada and H.A. Labeodan (eds.), Religion and Governance in Nigeria: Dedicated to Late Dr. Akintunde, Dorcas Olubanke (Ibadan Religious Studies Series 4, Ibadan: Dept. of Religious Studies, University of Ibadan, 2012), pp. 167–178.
(2014) shows that “truth” is understood in a Christological sense and that it is generally accepted that the truth of the gospel constitutes unity in the church. Kammler also works out the implications of this insight for current oecumenical dialogues.
Alice Matilda Nsiah
and
Eric Nii Bortey Anum
271261 L.M. Hess, “Encountering Habits of Mind at Table: Kashrut, Jews, and Christians”, Cross Currents 62:3 (2012), pp. 328–336.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-3881.2012.00244.x
(2014) appropriate 4:21–31 for the Ghanaian context: some Ghanaians play the same power games as the Judaisers, and Ghanaians should thus rather realise that the New Jerusalem implies freedom and justice for them. Jennifer Slater
272262 D.A. deSilva, “Neither Tamil nor Sinhalese: Reading Galatians with Sri Lankan Christians”, in: C. Keener and M.D. Carroll (eds.), Global Voices: Reading the Bible in the Majority World (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2013), pp. 39–55. See also the response by N. Gupta, “Response: What Does Sri Lanka Have to do with Galatia? The Hermeneutical Challenges, Benefits, and Potential of Global Readings of Scripture”, in: C. Keener and M.D. Carroll R. (eds.), Global Voices: Reading the Bible in the Majority World (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2013), pp. 57–61.
(2014) explains how what is theologically implicit in Paul’s call to freedom in 5:1 can be made explicit in South Africa, especially by countering corruption. In another contribution, Slater
273263 G.D. Cloete, “Galatians 2:15–21 and the Belhar Confession (1986) in Dialogue”, Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif 54:5 (2013), pp. 93–104.
https://doi.org/10.5952/54-0-346
(2016) uses 3:28 as a point of departure for outlining a way to cultivate an inclusive type of diversity in South Africa. According to Zorodzai Dube
274264 M. Welch, “Man-ifestation of the Spirit: An Investigation on the Impact of a Curriculum and Small Group Spiritual Direction on the Spiritual Formation of Protestant Men”, Pastoral Psychology 62:1 (2013), pp. 81–99.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-012-0449-9
(2015), the way in which Paul contrasts the image of Abraham with that of Moses in Galatians (Abraham was the public image best representing cosmopolitan and heterogeneous identity in the Hellenistic setup) can help one to understand the debate about statues in South Africa. A hermetical interrogation of 3:28 and the situation of women in the Church of Christ in Zimbabwe by Francis Machingura and Paradzai Nyakuhwa
275265 G. Mombi, “The Death of Christ and Its Meaning for Melanesians from Paul’s Letter to the Galatians: From Fear to Freedom”, Melanesian Journal of Theology 29:2 (2013), pp. 79–162.
(2015) reveals the extent of sexism in this denomination. It is clear that gender discrimination, prejudice and stereotyping prevent females from occupying leadership positions. Emily A. Peck-McClain
276266 H. Leander, “Reading Paul in Post-Lutheran Sweden: On the Significance of Ethnic Difference and Belonging”, Studia Theologica 68:2 (2014), pp. 184–205.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0039338X.2014.961200
(2015) considers the implications of the notion of agency in Paul’s letters for adolescent girls. The type of agency depicted in 2:20 can offer liberation and hope for adolescent girls, since it is possible to live in the faith in/of Christ even though the power of sin has not been conquered fully. Felix H. Cortez
277267 R. Mahmutćehajić, The Praised and the Virgin: Translated by Desmond Maurer and Saba Risaluddin (Philosophy of Religion: World Religions, Leiden/Boston: MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 165–171.
(2015) addresses the mission-dilemma in Seventh-day Adventism by discussing Paul’s views on the poor, as may be seen in texts such as 2:10 and 6:10. Paul regarded caring for the poor as an essential part of the gospel with no contradiction between mission and social relief. Noting that Galatians has often been used in the past to foster division amongst believers, Marion L.S. Carson
278268 M.W. Elliott, “Judaism, Reformation Theology, and Justification”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 143–158.
(2015) suggests that one should rather view Paul as tackling “immature religion” in the letter. In our context, believers can follow Paul’s arguments, but not the divisive approach that he used. Michael H. Crosby
279269 T. Söding, “Theologie im Dialog: Der Galater- und Römerbrief als Paradigma”, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 111:4 (2014), pp. 374–388.
https://doi.org/10.1628/004435414X14135326005915
(2015) offers an appropriation of the “fruit of the Spirit” (5:22–23) as an expression of Pauline mysticism for our times. Crosby believes that such a mystical theology will help to cross the divide between episcopal nomists and other Catholics who are not satisfied with institutional Catholicism. Leslie T. Hardin
280270 H.-C. Kammler, “Die Wahrheit des Evangeliums und die Einheit der Kirche: Exegetische Überlegungen zu ihrem sachlichen Verhältnis”, Kerygma und Dogma 60:2 (2014), pp. 126–152.
https://doi.org/10.13109/kedo.2014.60.2.126
(2015) investigates the viability of Pauline spirituality in a digital age. Hardin offers an overview of the spiritual practices that Paul engaged in and stresses that spirituality was more than mere experience for him. It entailed everyday practices under the guidance of the Spirit – an approach that can still work in our time. P. Adam McClendon
281271 A.M. Nsiah and E.N.B. Anum, “Hagar Sarah Allegory: An Intertexture Study of Gal 4:21–31 and Its Application to the Ghanaian Context”, in: C.N. Omenyo and E.B. Anum (eds.), Trajectories of Religion in Africa: Essays in Honour of John S. Pobee (Studies in World Christianity & Interreligious Relations 48, Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2014), pp. 383–393.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401210577_023
(2015) looks critically at contemporary Christian spiritualities in the light of the spirituality of Galatians. McClendon approaches the spirituality of the letter from four angles: the central position of the cross, the central position of Christ, the continued tension caused by the flesh and how faith is authenticated according to the letter. Minggus Dilla
282272 J. Slater, “Freedom: The Liberative Value and Ethical Credential for Christian Living in South Africa”, Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 148 (2014), pp. 48–64.
(2015) regards “the fruit of the Spirit” (5:22–23) as the most important aspect in the lives of believers and explains what this entails practically in daily life. Lovemore Togarasei
283273 J. Slater, “Intersecting Culture, Values and Transformation in Shaping an Integrated Ethnic Identity within a Diastratically Variated Society: Employing South Africa as a Case Study”, Verbum et Ecclesia 37:1 (2016), pp. 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ve.v37i1.1598
(2016) points out that Christianity has still not succeeded in providing an alternative identity to ethnicity in Africa. Accordingly, Togarasei investigates the implications of Pauline texts such as 3:28 for Christian identity in this continent. According to Thomas Söding
284274 Z. Dube, “The Statue Debate: Ancestors and ‘Mnemonic Energy’ in Paul and Now”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 71:3 (2015), pp. 1–5.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v71i3.3035
(2016), Galatians calls for a “fundamental ecumenism” (“Fundamentalökumene”) in current times, implying that unity should be approached from the common task of witnessing to God. This witness should be polyphonic but should also have a common orientation to the canon. Holger Zeigan
285275 F. Machingura and P. Nyakuhwa, “Sexism: A Hermetical Interrogation of Galatians 3:28 and Women in the Church of Christ in Zimbabwe”, Journal of Pan African Studies 8:2 (2015), pp. 92–113.
(2016) notes that Galatians does not receive much attention in religious instruction in schools in Germany and offers various suggestions as to how it could be used effectively in competency-oriented religious instruction (“kompetenzorientierte Religionsunterricht”). Axel Wiemer
286276 E.A. Peck-McClain, “Agency in Paul and Implications for Adolescent Girls”, Religious Education 110:1 (2015), pp. 95–109.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00344087.2015.989099
(2017) also draws attention the fact that the Pauline letters do not receive much attention in religious instruction in schools in Germany. Accordingly, Wiemer uses Galatians as an example of how dealing with Paul’s theology is not only possible, but also meaningful. Neville Curle
287277 F.H. Cortez, “The Mission-Charity Dilemma: Fresh Perspectives from Paul’s Practice”, Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 26:1 (2015), pp. 160–173.
(2017) identifies three facets of patriarchalism (racism, sexism and classicism) practised in the Kingdom of Swaziland that are in conflict with 3:26–29. Jacobus de Koning
288278 M.L.S. Carson, “Grown up Religion: Polemic and Pastoral Practice in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, The Expository Times 127:3 (2015), pp. 105–113.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014524614535155
(2017) identifies 6:2 as the guideline for Christian ethics in the new dispensation. According to this verse, the law is replaced by the crucified Christ. De Koning also works out the implications of this insight for believers in South Africa. Allen J. McNicol
289279 M.H. Crosby, Fruit of the Spirit: Pauline Mysticism for the Church Today (Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 2015).
(2017) explains why baptism was so important to Paul and how 3:26–29 fits in with his broader argument in the letter. McNicol also points out why baptism is still important in the church nowadays. Ashok Ram Rana
290280 L.T. Hardin, “Is a Pauline Spirituality Still Viable?”, Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care 8:2 (2015), pp. 132–146.
https://doi.org/10.1177/193979091500800202
(2017) investigates the socio-historical context of the Antioch incident, in particular how eating together affects the identity of individuals and communities. Rana then appropriates the results of the investigation for a pluralistic Indian context. C. Melissa Snarr
291281 P.A. McClendon, Paul’s Spirituality in Galatians: A Critique of Contemporary Christian Spiritualities (Eugene OR: Wipf & Stock, 2015).
(2017) agrees with empire-critical readings of 2:10 (such as those offered by Brigitte Kahl) and works out the contemporary implications of such insights. Believers should acknowledge religious differences in their communities and try to create fellowship by remembering the poor. Daniel Herskowitz
292282 M. Dilla, “Makna Buah Roh dalam Galatia 5:22–23”, Manna Rafflesia 1:2 (2015), pp. 158–166.
https://doi.org/10.38091/man_raf.v1i2.51
(2017) explains how the concept of a “moment” (“oieblik” in Danish) was interpreted by Kierkegaard (in the light of 1 Corinthians 15:52 and Galatians 4:4) and then taken up and developed further by Martin Heidegger and Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik. Michael F. Bird and John Anthony Dunne
293283 L. Togarasei, “Rethinking Christian Identity: African Reflections from Pauline Writings”, Perichoresis 14:1 (2016), pp. 101–114.
https://doi.org/10.1515/perc-2016-0006
(2017) describe Paul’s ministry in Galatians as “pastoring with a big stick” and draw attention to two important issues that can help us to understand his ministry in this letter better: his role as heresiologist and his maternal attitude toward the readers (4:12ff.). David G. Horrell
294284 T. Söding, “Streiten verbindet: Der Galaterbrief als Wegweiser der Ökumene”, in: U. Luz, T. Söding and S. Vollenweider (eds.), Exegese – Ökumenisch engagiert: Der “Evangelisch-Katholische Kommentar” in der Diskussion über 500 Jahre Reformation (Ostfildern/Göttingen: Patmos Verlag/Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), pp. 89–98.
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783788731823.89
(2017) uses insights from the history of interpretation of 3:28 to show how important it is for exegetes to acknowledge their own particularity and to realise that they need insights from other interpreters who are located and embodied differently. One of the issues that Christof Landmesser
295285 H. Zeigan, “Die Bibel im kompetenzorientierten Religionsunterricht: Ein Kommentar zum Galaterbrief aus religionsdidaktischer Perspektive”, Theologische Beiträge 47:4 (2016), pp. 210–223.
(2017) discusses in a contribution on F.C. Baur as interpreter of Paul, is his views on Galatians. Baur regarded Galatians as the oldest letter of Paul that we have and as providing insight into the beginning of the struggle between Christianity and Judaism. One of the passages that Fatima Tofighi
296286 A. Wiemer, Der Galaterbrief im Religionsunterricht: Die Theologie des Paulus in ihrer Zeit und im Dialog mit Jugendlichen heute (Neukirchener Theologie, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017).
(2017) investigates in a study on the way in which Paul’s letters were used to construct the European self, is 2:11–14. Tofighi shows how a Lutheran binary of faith vs. guilt in Pauline interpretation has been replaced by a universal vs. particular binary but argues that this is not necessarily less arbitrary or exclusivist than the Lutheran binary. Radu Gheorghiță
297287 N. Curle, “A Critique of the Patriarchalistic Paradigm as Practised in the Kingdom of Swaziland”, Conspectus 23 (2017), pp. 57–97.
(2018) illustrates the importance of the Reformed notion of sola fide by an exegesis of 2:15–21. Gheorghiță believes this message remains valid today and that Paul would have added another important notion: solum evangelium. Marie-Theres Wacker
298288 J. de Koning, “Die Riglyn vir Christen Etiek: Galasiërs 6:2 onder die Loep”, In die Skriflig 51:1 (2017), pp. 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ids.v51i1.2205
(2018) explains how a postcolonial approach to 3:27–28 can help to achieve diversity in Asian Christianity. The following issues receive attention: language, circumcision (against the background of the New Perspective on Paul), slavery and gender. Rotimi Odudele
299289 A.J. McNicol, “Baptism and the Moral Life”, Christian Studies 29 (2017), pp. 33–46.
(2018) approaches 3:28 from the perspective of ethnicity. The revolutionary perspective on social ethics offered by this text is then applied to contemporary Nigerian society. Kartini Hutagaol
300290 A.R. Rana, Socio-Historical Context of Paul’s Confrontation in Galatians and Christian Identity in a Pluralistic Society (Biblical Hermeneutics Rediscovered 5, New Delhi: Christian World Imprints, 2017).
(2018) illustrates how faith-based learning along the lines of 5:22–23 can work practically in the teaching of mathematics. By means of such an approach the characters of students can be formed for the present and for eternal life. According to Keith Maynor
301291 C.M. Snarr, “Remembering the Poor: Interfaith Collaboration, Neoliberalism, and an Anti-Imperial Gospel”, Journal of the Society of Christian Ethics 37:1 (2017), pp. 25–44.
https://doi.org/10.1353/sce.2017.0005
(2018), the central issue in 1:16–2:21 is not so much Paul’s polemics, but rather his testimony about the way in which he was transformed at the Damascus event. Maynor develops the implications of this insight for current transformational leadership theory. Shabbir Akhtar
302292 D. Herskowitz, “Authenticity, Repentance and the Second Coming: ‘The Moment’ in Kierkegaard, Heidegger and Rabbi Soloveitchik”, Journal of Scriptural Reasoning 16:1 (2017), pp. 1–5.
(2018) offers a Muslim perspective on Galatians, in particular challenging Paul’s claim that Christ liberates one from religious law. Akhtar also spends much time on themes that either unite or divide the three monotheistic religions. Peter Oakes
303293 M.F. Bird and J.A. Dunne, “Pastoring with a Big Stick: Paul as Pastor in Galatians”, in: B.S. Rosner, A.S. Malone and T.J. Burke (eds.), Paul as
(2018) offers an overview and evaluation of N.T. Wright’s interpretation of Galatians. In particular, Oakes highlights the manner in which Wright succeeds in conveying difficult scholarly concepts on Galatians in his Paul for Everyone series. Michael L. Sweeney
304
(London: T & T Clark/Bloomsbury, 2017), pp. 71–82. Pastor
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567677938.ch-006
(2019) appropriates the Pauline collection (mentioned in 2:10 and in other Pauline letters) for our times by viewing it as an expression of church solidarity between different areas in Early Christianity. According to Sweeney, the underlying values and motives can guide the current church in its mission, in particular by creating cross-cultural partnerships between churches. Christine Wenona Hoffmann
305294 D.G. Horrell, “Paul, Inclusion and Whiteness: Particularizing Interpretation”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 40:2 (2017), pp. 123–147.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064x17739204
(2019) investigated 235 sermons on Galatians 2:16 and Romans 3:28 in order to identify pitfalls and benefits caused by the interaction between text, tradition and sermon. Hoffmann also makes suggestions as to how one can avoid such pitfalls. Kang-Yup Na
306295 C. Landmesser, “Ferdinand Christian Baur as Interpreter of Paul: History, the Absolute, and Freedom”, in: M. Bauspiess, C. Landmesser and D. Lincicum (eds.), Ferdinand Christian Baur and the History of Early Christianity (Translated by Robert F. Brown and Peter C. Hodgson) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), pp. 147–176.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198798415.003.0007
This book is an English version of: M. Bauspiess, L. Christof and L. David (eds.), Ferdinand Christian Baur und die Geschichte des frühen Christentums (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.333, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014).
(2019) offers a multidimensional reading of Galatians on the theme of borders in the light of a Korean world view (in particular in terms of the concept of dao). According to Na, “Seen through a dao lens, Paul’s use of κτίσις [‘creation’] and his allusions to creation signal the ultimate border-crossing, from this age into the apocalyptic age to come, from separation and alienation to the primordial dynamics of undifferentiated reality”.
307296 F. Tofighi, Paul’s Letters and the Construction of the European Self (Library of New Testament Studies 572/Scriptural Traces: Critical Perspectives on the Reception and Influence of the Bible 10, London: Bloomsbury/T & T Clark, 2017), pp. 65–93.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567672551
Cynthia M. Montaudon-Tomas
308297 R. Gheorghiță, “Solum evangelium – Gal 2:15–21”, Jurnal teologic 17:1 (2018), pp. 5–45.
(2019) explains how organisations may avoid spiritual bankruptcy by fostering an organisational spirituality based on Biblical and Christian values such as “the fruit of the Spirit” (5:22–23). On the basis of an empirical study, Debra J. Dean
309298 M.-T. Wacker, “Postcolonial Approaches to Gal 3.27–28 to Achieve Diversity in Asian Christianity”, in: D.F. Pilario, F. Wilfred and H.P.
(2019) argues that the nine “fruits” of the Spirit (5:22–23) are beneficial for organisations, since they enhance engagement of employees, satisfaction with one’s job, commitment to the organisation and organisational spirituality. Bruce E. Winston
310
Asian Christianities (Concilium 2018/1, London: SCM, 2018), pp. 47–55. Ho (eds.),
(2019) highlights guidelines from 6:1–10, illustrating how important it is that employees help one another, but arguing also that this should only happen to the point that they should not help others too much, since this may cause their own failure. Lucien Legrand
311299 R. Odudele, “Unity in Diversity for Sustainable Development in Nigeria: A Sociological Exegesis of Galatians 3:28”, Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa 20:2 (2018), pp. 148–157.
(2019) uses 2:11–14 as a window showing how the early church struggled with the contextualisation of the gospel. This is appropriated for our current situation: “Contextualisation is the search for a koinonia [‘fellowship’] that, while remaining faithful to the ‘truth of the Gospel,’ takes into account the rich pluralism of world/human panorama.”
312300 K. Hutagaol, “Pendekatan Faith Learning dalam Pembelajaran Matematika”, Jurnal Padegogik 1:2 (2018), pp. 32–47.
https://doi.org/10.35974/jpd.v1i2.655
Céline Rohmer
313301 K. Maynor, “Social and Cultural Textures in Galatians 1”, Journal of Biblical Perspectives in Leadership 8:1 (2018), pp. 226–235.
(2019) argues that although the writers of the New Testament do not know the notion of synodality (literally, “having a common way”), their writings show what it means to be on a journey with Christ, an experience giving rise to true synodal events. The plurality of voices in this regard (amongst others, reflected in Galatians 2) give current believers a pragmatic freedom in Christ regarding synodal matters in our time. Tom Morris
314302 S. Akhtar, The New Testament in Muslim Eyes: Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (Routledge Reading the Bible in Islamic Contexts 2, London/New York NY: Routledge, 2018).
(2020) views Paul’s behaviour in 2:11–14 as an example of bold leadership in a time of crisis. Like Paul, leaders in our time should have the moral courage to confront any form of unethical behaviour. Likewise, Aseng Yulias Samongilailai
315303 P. Oakes, “Tom (a.k.a. N.T.) Wright on Galatians”, in: J.A. Dunne and E. Lewellen (eds.), One God, One People, One Future: Essays in Honour of N.T. Wright (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2018), pp. 256–265.
(2020) shows from the same passage that it is appropriate for believers to rebuke spiritual leaders when they have deviated from the truth of the gospel. One of the examples that Ellen T. Charry
316304 M.L. Sweeney, “The Pauline Collection, Church Partnerships, and the Mission of the Church in the 21st Century”, Missiology 48:2 (2019), pp. 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091829619887387
(2020) uses to illustrate the danger of anti-Jewish attitudes in Christian preaching (and how to avoid it) is a recent sermon on 3:23–29. On the basis of Pauline pneumatology (as reflected amongst others in Galatians), Wei Hua
317305 C.W. Hoffmann, Homiletik und Exegese: Konzepte von Rechtfertigung in der evangelischen Predigtpraxis der Gegenwart (Arbeiten zur Praktischen Theologie 75, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2019).
(2020) argues that the Spirit can transform a culture receiving the Christian gospel. Accordingly, it is possible that Chinese commemorating rites can be renewed and practised by Chinese Christians as a type of humanising etiquette. In three studies of the views of evangelical Christian college students, Diana R. Rice
318306 K.-Y. Na, “Of Great Walls, DMZs, and Other Lines in the Sand: The Truth (of the Gospel) About Borders and Barriers – and Crossing Them in Galatians”, in: J. Ahn (ed.), Landscapes of Korean and Korean American Biblical Interpretation (International Voices in Biblical Studies 10, Atlanta SBL Press, 2019), pp. 217–240.
(2020) found that they consistently regarded “the fruit of the Spirit” (5:22–23) as having primarily feminine characteristics. Rice also discusses the implications this has for gender stereotyping. Stephen J. Patterson
319307 Op. cit., p. 240.
(2020) challenges churches in the USA to dust off the ancient creed in 3:26–28 in order to react to the widespread racism and inequality in the country. Tomasz Kopiczko
320308 C.M. Montaudon-Tomas, “Avoiding Spiritual Bankruptcy in Organizations through the Fruit of the Spirit”, Journal of Biblical Perspectives in Leadership 9:1 (2019), pp. 17–34.
(2020) discusses “the fruit of the Spirit” (5:22–23) in the light of catechetical documents. Kopiczko emphasises the role of the Spirit and that “the fruit of the Spirit” is a characteristic of a mature faith. The task of catechesis is to help believers discover the gifts of the Spirit. In a study of Pauline ethics in 5:13–14 and Romans 13:8–10, Mariapushpam Paulraj
321309 D.J. Dean, “Integration of Christian Values in the Workplace”, Journal of Biblical Perspectives in Leadership 9:1 (2019), pp. 35–55.
(2020) argues that Paul correctly makes Jesus’ proclamation of love the foundation of his ethics but that one should also take note of the fact that Paul in his exhortations tends to reduce love to insiders and that this might cause the church to become inward-looking. In a study of inter-church relationships in the Pauline letters (amongst others, Galatians), James T. Hughes
322310 B.E. Winston, Biblical Principles of Being an Employee in Contemporary Organizations (Christian Faith Perspectives in Leadership and Business, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019), pp. 45–48.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11169-4_4
(2020) finds clear indications of a drive towards ecclesial solidarity (in belief and actions) and towards inter-church and trans-local relationships between congregations. This should inform the way in which churches interact nowadays.
5. Studies covering broader periods of time
Taking Hans Dieter Betz’s interpretation of 5:17 as point of departure, John K. Riches
323311 L. Legrand, “The Antiochian Conflict in Galatians 2:11–14: Contextualisation Problems in Apostolic Times”, Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 83:4 (2019), pp. 242–262.
(2001) investigates the way in which John Chrysostom and Luther interpreted the text. Riches concludes that the task of Biblical interpreters is no longer to offer a single normative interpretation of Biblical texts but to uncover the diverse interpretations that are possible. One of the examples that John L. Thompson
324312 Op. cit., p. 24.
(2001) uses to show how women in the Old Testament who were depicted as experiencing violence were interpreted by “traditional” interpreters is Hagar. According to Thompson, it does not seem as if Paul’s allegorical interpretation of Hagar in Galatians prejudiced later interpreters too much, since Patristic, medieval and Reformation commentators displayed an intense interest in Hagar’s suffering. Earl S. Johnson Jr.
325313 C. Rohmer, “De la tradition synodale à l’événement synodal ou comment la Bible interroge la pratique”, Recherches de Science Religieuse 107:2 (2019), pp. 209–224.
https://doi.org/10.3917/rsr.192.0207
(2003) discusses the way in which 3:28 has been interpreted in Presbyterian circles. Johnson begins with the view of Calvin, who interpreted the verse as not indicating equality between men and women, and then shows how this and other similar views only started to change – very slowly – at a much later time (around the middle of the nineteenth century). Lidija Gunjević
326314 T. Morris, “Bold Leadership in Times of Crises: Inclusion, Fear, and Courage in Galatians 2:11–14”, in: B.E. Winston (ed.), Leadership Growth through Crisis: An Investigation of Leader Development During Tumultous Circumstances (Christian Faith Perspectives in Leadership and Business, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020), pp. 155–174.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25439-1_10
(2007) explains the way in which the opposites body and spirit in Galatians are interpreted by Augustine, Aquinas, Luther and some modern interpreters. Augustine, Aquinas and Luther understood “body” as an anthropological description whereas modern interpreters tend to interpret it as an eschatological category. John K. Riches
327315 A.Y. Samongilailai, “Studi Gramatikal Galatia 2:11–14: Patutkah Menegur Pemimpin Rohani?”, Dunamis: Jurnal Teologi dan Pendidikan Kristiani 4:2 (2020), pp. 183–206.
https://doi.org/10.30648/dun.v4i2.254
(2008) provides an overview of the manner in which Galatians was interpreted through the ages, focusing on important commentators from Marcion to Lightfoot (including more recent scholars). Christopher Heard
328316 E.T. Charry, “Awakening to Judaism and Jews in Christian Preaching”, The International Journal of Homiletics 4 (2020), pp. 41–73.
(2014) explains the interpretation of the stories of Hagar and Ishmael in Genesis 16–25 critically. Heard classifies the approaches to these stories as either allegorical (as in Paul’s case), literal or moral, pointing out that Hagar and Ishmael almost always end up being depicted negatively. Heard thus suggests better ways of interpreting the stories about them. Nyasha Junior
329317 W. Hua, “Pauline Pneumatology and the Chinese Rites: Spirit and Culture in the Holy See’s Missionary Strategy”, in: G.L. Green, S.T. Pardue and K.K. Yeo (eds.), Majority World Theology: Christian Doctrine in Global Context (Downers Grove IL: Intervarsity Press, 2020), pp. 280‑294.
(2019) provides a history of reception of Hagar, focusing in particular on the view that Hagar was a black woman. In the first chapter, Junior looks at the way in which Hagar is represented in the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament (Galatians 4) and the Qur’an. Junior points out that these texts did not offer a physical description of Hagar but were rather used to rationalise ethnic or religious differences.318 D.R. Rice, “Against Such Things There Is No Law: Evangelical College Students’ Perceptions of the Fruit of the Spirit as Primarily Gendered”, Journal of Psychology and Theology 49:1 (2020), pp. 38–52.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091647120907984
319 S.J. Patterson, “A Forgotten Creed in the Summer of Rage”, Dialog: A Journal of Theology 59:3 (2020), pp. 188–190.
https://doi.org/10.1111/dial.12598
320 T. Kopiczko, “Biblijne owoce Ducha Świętego (Ga 5,22–23) na Drodze do Dojrzałej Wiary w Katechezie”, Verbum Vitae 37:1 (2020), pp. 257–270.
https://doi.org/10.31743/W.4816
321 M. Paulraj, “Love of Neighbour: The Axis of Pauline Ethics: A Brief Study of Gal 5:13–14 and Rom 13:8–10”, Jnanadeepa 24:1 (2020), pp. 74–94.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4060142
322 J.T. Hughes, “Inter-Church Relationships in Paul’s Epistles”, The Global Anglican 134:3 (2020), pp. 251–261. 323 J.K. Riches, “Theological Interpretation of the New Testament and the History of Religions: Some Reflections in the Light of Galatians 5:17”, in: A.Y. Collins and M.M. Mitchell (eds.), Antiquity and Humanity: Essays on Ancient Religion and Philosophy Presented to Hans Dieter Betz on His 70th Birthday (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), pp. 245–262. 324 J.L. Thompson, Writing the Wrongs: Women of the Old Testament among Biblical Commentators from Philo through the Reformation (Oxford Studies in Historical Theology, Oxford/New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2001).
https://doi.org/10.1093/0195137361.001.0001
325 E.S. Johnson Jr., Witness without Parallel: Eight Biblical Texts That Make Us Presbyterian (Louisville KY: Geneva, 2003), pp. 73–89. 326 L. Gunjević, “Suprotnost Tijelo/Duh u Poslanici Galaćanima”, Služba Božja 47:4 (2007), pp. 357–380. 327 J.K. Riches, Galatians through the Centuries (Blackwell Bible Commentaries, Malden MA/Oxford: Blackwell, 2008). See also: J. Riches, “Galatians”, in: M. Lieb, E. Mason, J. Roberts and C. Rowland (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Reception History of the Bible (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 149–160.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199204540.001.0001
328 C. Heard, “On the Road to Paran: Toward a Christian Perspective on Hagar and Ishmael”, Interpretation 68:3 (2014), pp. 270–285.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0020964314529516
329 N. Junior, Reimagining Hagar: Blackness and Bible (Biblical Refigurations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019), pp. 20–45.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198745327.003.0001
Chapter 4:
Interpretative ApproachesOne of the most striking aspects in the history of interpretation of Galatians is the growing diversity in exegetical approaches that are followed by scholars. Although it is not always possible to distinguish clearly between the types of approaches that are followed, I have tried to place the contributions in separate categories. In cases where a particular approach could fit in more than one category, I have placed it in the category that seems to fit best what the scholar has in mind.
1. Paul’s use of the Hebrew Scriptures
This aspect received much attention from scholars and the issue was investigated from several different angles:
1.1 Studies discussing quotations in the letter as a whole
Moisés Silva
11 M. Silva, “Galatians”, in: G. Beale and D. Carson (eds.), Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2007), pp. 785–810.
(2007) discusses two allusions and all the quotations in Galatians. Silva’s study is based on the premise that Paul did not only depend on the Hebrew Scriptures when he was under pressure from Jewish opponents, but that its conceptual world was fundamental to his theology. Dan Batovici
22 D. Batovici, “A Few Notes on the Use of the Scripture in Galatians”, Sacra Scripta: Journal of the Centre for Biblical Studies 11:2 (2013), pp. 287‑301.
(2013) draws attention to the function of references to the Hebrew Scriptures in Galatians. Batovici shows that Paul generally used them to provide proof for his arguments. Sometimes he departed from the original meaning of a quotation and in several cases, he used texts to tell believers what to do even though the texts indicated the opposite. Martinus C. de Boer
33 M.C. de Boer, Paul, Theologian of God’s Apocalypse: Essays on Paul and Apocalyptic (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2020), pp. 153–168. See also the earlier version: M. C. de Boer, “Observations on the Significance of the Old Testament in Galatians”, in: B. Koet, S. Moyise and J. Verheyden (eds.), The Scriptures of Israel in Jewish and Christian Tradition: Essays in Honour of Maarten J.J. Menken (Novum Testamentum Supplements 148, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill 2013), pp. 211–226.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004247727_015
(2020) discusses the status that the text of the Hebrew Scriptures had for Paul in Galatians, in particular its value or authority. De Boer is of the opinion that Paul selected texts that supported his interpretation of the gospel and that undermined the claims of his opponents. Since Scripture was regarded by his opponents as an absolute authority, Paul tried to make it captive for his own gospel.
1.2 Studies discussing quotations/echoes in a specific pericope or verse(s)
1:8According to Seth M. Ehorn
44 S.M. Ehorn, “Galatians 1:8 and Paul’s Reading of Abraham’s Story”, The Journal of Theological Studies 64:2 (2013), pp. 439–444.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/flt086
(2013), Paul’s reference to “an angel from heaven” in this verse makes sense if one keeps in mind the important role that the Abraham narrative plays in the letter. Paul had in mind the angelic visitors who conveyed a promise to Abraham (Genesis 18:10, 14).1:13–16On the basis of the similarities between Paul’s statement in 1:15–16a on the one hand and Isaiah 49:1 and Jeremiah 1:5 on the other, Tae Hoon Kim
55 T.H. Kim, “Paul’s Experience at Damascus According to Quotations of the Old Testament: On the Basis of Galatians 1:15–16a”, 성경과 신학 76 (2015), pp. 101–128.
(2015) argues that Paul saw an analogy between what happened to him and the calling of the Servant of the Lord and Jeremiah. Thus, Paul’s experience is best described as a “calling” and not as a “conversion”. From the fact that Paul uses Isaiah 49:1–6 in Galatians 1:13–16 to describe his conversion, Bart J. Koet
66 B.J. Koet, “Paul, a Light for the Gentiles: Paul as Interpreter of Scriptures in Galatians 1:13–16 and in the Acts of the Apostles”, in: F. Wilk and M. Öhler (eds.), Paulinische Schriftrezeption: Grundlagen – Ausprägungen – Wirkungen – Wertungen (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 268, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), pp. 249–274.
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666540608.249
(2017) deduces that Paul understood himself as following in the footsteps of the Jewish prophets. Luke describes Paul as a Jew loyal to the law, focusing on the Jews, but as then finding his way to the Gentiles on the basis of Isaiah 48:6 – an indication that Luke depicts him in the light of his (i.e., Paul’s) self-understanding.2:2B.J. Oropeza
77 B.J. Oropeza, “Running in Vain, but Not as an Athlete (Galatians 2:2): The Impact of Habakkuk 2:2–4 on Paul’s Apostolic Commission”, in:
(2009) thinks that Paul used the running metaphor in this verse, since he regarded himself as a prophetic herald like Habakkuk. This not only referred to his vocation as a missionary, but also to his message, in which Habakkuk’s statement that a righteous person would live by faith played a key role.2:16One of the issues that Jean-Sébastian Rey
8
Jesus and Paul: Global Perspectives in Honor of James D.G. Dunn for His 70th Birthday (Library of New Testament Studies 414, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2009), pp. 139–150. B.J. Oropeza, C.K. Robertson and D.C. Morhmann (eds.),
(2014) highlights in a discussion of the “interdiscursivity” between the Dead Sea Scrolls and Galatians is what is known as “doxic discourse” (“discours doxique”). This refers to the way in which Paul refers to Psalm 143:2 in this verse.3:1–5William N. Wilder
98 J.-S. Rey, “Les manuscrits de la Mer Morte et l’Épître aux Galates: Quelques cas d’interdiscursivité”, in: J.-S. Rey (ed.), The Dead Sea Scrolls and Pauline Literature (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 102, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 17–49.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004230071_004
(2017) interprets the expression “hearing of faith” (vv. 2 and 5) as an echo of Isaiah 53:1, meant as a warning to the Galatians that their obstinacy amidst miracles is similar to that of Israel.3:6–14This pericope received the most attention of scholars, since it contains several quotations. Some contributions focused on specific quotations in the pericope whereas others discussed the whole pericope or a certain part of the pericope. We will first look at studies devoted to particular verses before discussing the latter.3:6–7According to Maureen W. Yeung
109 W.N. Wilder, “‘To Whom Has the Arm of the Lord Been Revealed?’: Signs and Wonders in Paul’s Isaianic Mission to the Gentiles (Romans 15:18–21 and Galatians 3:1–5)”, in: T.A. Wilson and P.R. House (eds.), The Crucified Apostle: Essays on Peter and Paul (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.450, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), pp. 225–260.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155610-4
(2002), Paul did not follow the Jewish Biblical tradition regarding Genesis 15:6. Instead of linking Abraham’s righteousness to his obedience, Paul offered a new definition of the offspring of Abraham in terms of justification by faith, thus taking Jesus’ view of faith seriously. Based on etymology and the Hebrew Scriptures, Jose Enrique Aguilar Chiu
1110 M.W. Yeung, Faith in Jesus and Paul: A Comparison with Special Reference to “Faith That Can Remove Mountains” and “Your Faith Has Healed/Saved You” (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.147, Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 2002), pp. 226–286.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157184-8
(2013) identifies the basic meaning of the concept “righteousness” as conformity to something that has been indicated. This makes sense of the way in which Paul quotes Genesis 15:6 (as in Galatians), since faith implies conformity to God’s word. One of the issues that Štefan Paluchník
1211 J.E. Aguilar Chiu, “The Basic Meaning of Righteousness and the Pauline Quote of Gn 15:6”, Estudios Bíblicos 71:2 (2013), pp. 235–269.
(2016) discusses in a contribution on Paul and early Christian traditions is Paul’s interpretation of Genesis 15:6. For Paul, this particular verse became the basic text (“Grundtext”) indicating the uniqueness of faith in Christ.3:8Jared M. August
1312 Š. Paluchník, “Der Apostel Paulus und die älteren christlichen Traditionen”, Communio Viatorum 58:1 (2016), pp. 55–76.
(2019) tries to identify the promises that Paul referred to in 3:8 and 3:16. August argues that the syntax and the theme highlighted here indicate that Paul had Genesis 22:18 in mind.3:10Timothy G. Gombis
1413 J.M. August, “Paul’s View of Abraham’s Faith: Genesis 22:18 in Galatians 3”, Bibliotheca Sacra 176:701 (2019), pp. 51–61.
(2007) is critical of the way in which scholars interpret this verse and offers a novel interpretation of this pericope, arguing that Paul cited Deuteronomy 27:26 in continuity with its original setting in Deuteronomy. Roy E. Ciampa’s
1514 T.G. Gombis, “The ‘Transgressor’ and the ‘Curse of the Law’: The Logic of Paul’s Argument in Galatians 2–3”, New Testament Studies 53:1 (2007), pp. 81–93.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688507000057
contribution (2018) focuses on composite citations in 1 & 2 Corinthians and Galatians. In the case of Galatians, Ciampa discusses the combination of Deuteronomy 27:26 and 30:10 in 3:10. Ciampa points out that Paul does not often make use of composite quotations (only about 15% of the citations in 1 & 2 Corinthians and Galatians may be classified as composite citations) and that it seems as if he does so to increase the rhetorical effect of his argument. Young Namgung
1615 R.E. Ciampa, “Composite Citations in 1–2 Corinthians and Galatians”, in: S.A. Adams and S.M. Ehorn (eds.), Composite Citations in Antiquity: Volume Two: New Testament Uses (Library of New Testament Studies 593, London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2018), pp. 159–189.
(2018) argues for the traditional interpretation of 3:10, thus disagreeing with proposals made by scholars who opt for the New Perspective on Paul. Namgung supports this choice by focusing in particular on echoes to Isaiah 52:13–53:12 in this verse.3:11According to Moisés Silva
1716 Y. Namgung, “What Isaiah Has to Say About the Curse of the Law in Galatians 3:10”, Neotestamentica 52:1 (2018), pp. 69–90.
https://doi.
(2001), Paul did not abuse Habakkuk 2:4 as a mere proof text. He truly used it as a source for his views and teachings, strengthening the message of this text. Maureen W. Yeung
18
org/10.1353/neo.2018.0007
(2002) believes that Paul followed the context and original meaning of Habakkuk 2:4 carefully, but that he was also influenced by early church tradition (applying it to Christ) and might have been influenced by Jesus’ understanding of the text.3:12Friedrich Avemarie
1917 M. Silva, Interpreting Galatians: Explorations in Exegetical Method (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2001 [1996], 2nd edition), pp. 165–167.
(2005) argues that Paul uses Leviticus 18:5 in different ways in Romans and Galatians. In Galatians 3:12, he uses it to show that the law has nothing to do with faith, but in Romans 10:5, he interprets the “doing” of the law in a Christian sense. According to Nicole Chibici-Revneanu
2018 M.W. Yeung, Faith in Jesus and Paul: A Comparison with Special Reference to “Faith That Can Remove Mountains” and “Your Faith Has Healed/Saved You” (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.147, Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 2002), pp. 196–225.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157184-8
(2008), when Paul quoted Leviticus 18:5 in Galatians 3:12 and Romans 10:5, he focused specifically on the words ἐν αὐτοῖς (“in them”) in order to contrast a life in the law and a life from faith (ἐκ πίστεως; “from faith”). Preston M. Sprinkle
2119 F. Avemarie, “Paul and the Claim of the Law According to Scripture: Leviticus 18:5 in Galatians 3:12 and Romans 10:5”, in: J. Pastor and M. Mor (eds.), The Beginnings of Christianity: A Collection of Articles (Jerusalem: Yad ben-Zvi Press, 2005), pp. 125–148. Also available in: J. Frey and A. Standhartinger (eds.), Friedrich Avemarie: Neues Testament und frührabbinisches Judentum: Gesammelte Aufsätze (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.316, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013), pp. 511–530.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152924-5
(2009) identifies four different views of Paul’s use of Leviticus 18:5 in 3:12 and offers arguments for what is described as the “Law/Gospel (2)” approach: doing the law is criticised, since the law is defective. The problem thus lies with the law and not with humans, as is the case with what Sprinkle identifies as the “Law/Gospel (1)” approach. Jason S. DeRouchie
2220 N. Chibici-Revneanu, “Leben im Gesetz: Die paulinische Interpretation von Lev 18:5 (Gal 3:12; Röm 10:5)”, Novum Testamentum 50:2 (2008), pp. 105–119.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156853608X289856
(2020) approaches the matter from a redemptive historical perspective. Leviticus 18:5 depicts the situation under the Mosaic law-covenant. Humankind could not “do” the law so that they could attain life and thus the law became a guardian, enslaving them.3:13Franco Manzi
2321 P.M. Sprinkle, “Why Can’t ‘The One Who Does These Things Live by Them’?: The Use of Leviticus 18.5 in Galatians 3.12”, in: C.A. Evans and
(2002) discusses the way in which the annulment of the curse in Deuteronomy 21:23 in this verse was handled by Justin Martyr in his Dialogue of Trypho. Gert J. Steyn
24
Early Christian Literature and Intertextuality: Volume 2: Exegetical Studies (Library of New Testament Studies 392, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2009), pp. 126–137. H.D. Zacharias (eds.),
(2015) explains how Paul interpreted Christ’s death retrodictively (a new term introduced by Steyn, meant to replace the notion of the “prediction” of Christ’s death in the Hebrew Scriptures) by means of Deuteronomy 21:23 in order to portray him as the one liberating humankind from the law. Mary A. Wilson
2522 J.S. DeRouchie, “The Use of Leviticus 18:5 in Galatians 3:12: A Redemptive-Historical Reassessment”, Themelios 45:2 (2020), pp. 240–259.
(2015) is of the opinion that Paul regarded Christ’s death on the cross as an unexpected fulfilment of a ritual referred to in the Hebrew Scriptures according to which transgressors of the covenant were hanged. Paul thus applied Deuteronomy 21:23 to refer to the substitutionary nature of Christ’s death. Wilson points out that looking at the text from different angles helps one to identify multiple textures in it. Daniel R. Streett
2623 F. Manzi, “L’annullamento della Maledizione di Dt. 21,23 in Galati nel Dialogo con Trifone”, Augustinianum 42:1 (2002), pp. 5–34.
(2015) disagrees with the commonly-held view that Second Temple Judaism regarded everyone who was crucified as cursed. According to Streett, it was believed that Deuteronomy 21:23 implied that only those who were crucified and who were also guilty of capital crimes were cursed. Streett thus argues that Paul did not believe that Jesus was cursed by God only as a result of the way in which he died. That Jesus “became a curse” rather refers to the way in which he was humiliated and treated by his fellow-Jews. Michael M. Ramos
2724 G.J. Steyn, “‘Retrodiction’ of the Old Testament in the New: The Case of Deuteronomy 21:23 in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians and the Crucifixion of Yehoshua ben Yoseph”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 71:3 (2015), pp. 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v71i3.3091
(2016) uses social-rhetorical criticism to explain why Paul quoted Deuteronomy 27:26 to explain justification by faith in Christ. M. David Litwa
2825 M.A. Wilson, “‘Cursed Is Everyone Who Is Hanged on a Tree’: Paul’s Citation of Deut 21:23 in Gal 3:13”, Trinity Journal 36 (2015), pp. 217‑240.
(2020) traces the reception of Paul’s use of Deuteronomy 21:23 in Galatians 3:13 to refer to Jesus’ crucifixion as becoming a curse in texts from Nag Hammadi. Litwa shows that these texts acknowledged that Jesus was cursed, but that this was interpreted in several instances as only applying to his mortal part and not to his spiritual core.Studies discussing quotations in sections of 3:6-14 According to Jeffrey R. Wisdom
2926 D.R. Streett, “Cursed by God? Galatians 3:13, Social Status, and Atonement Theory in the Context of Early Jewish Readings of Deuteronomy 21:23”, Journal for the Study of Paul and his Letters 5:2 (2015), pp. 189–209.
(2001), from the way in which Paul cites from and interprets texts from Genesis and Deuteronomy in 3:8–10, it is clear that his interpretation differed from contemporary interpretations of these texts. He regarded the notion of Abraham being a blessing for the nations as a central part of the covenant with Abraham. He also stressed the curse on those who were disloyal to the Lord – a notion that he applied to those who were from the works of the law. Joel Willitts
3027 M.M. Ramos, “Deuteronomy 27:26: ‘The Curse of the Law’: Shall the People of God Be Identified by Law or by Christ?”, De La Salle Lipa Journal of Multidisciplinary Research 3:1 (2016), pp. 1–13.
(2003) points out that scholars have overlooked that Leviticus 18:5 was interpreted in later Jewish writings as referring to the fact that the potential of the covenant had not been realised. Paul might have understood this verse in a similar way, which implies that in 3:10–14 he was contrasting the age when the potential of the covenant was not yet realised with the age in which it happened. Sigurd Grindheim
3128 M.D. Litwa, “The Curse of the Creator: Galatians 3:13 and Negative Demiurgy”, in: F. Watson and S. Parkhouse (eds.), Telling the Christian Story Differently: Counter-Narratives from Nag Hammadi and Beyond (The Reception of Jesus in the First Three Centuries 5, London/New York NY/Oxford: T & T Clark Bloomsbury, 2020), pp. 13–30.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567679543.ch-001
(2007) is of the opinion that Paul regarded his fellow Jews, as well as himself during his time as Pharisee, as apostates and that such a perspective helps one to understand his use of Deuteronomy 27:26 and Leviticus 18:5 in 3:10–12 better. Paul read these texts in the light of the prophetic tradition, according to which they were regarded as the ground for divine judgement on Israel. Michael Bachmann
3229 J.R. Wisdom, Blessing for the Nations and the Curse of the Law: Paul’s Citation of Genesis and Deuteronomy in Gal 3.8–10 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.133, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157176-3
(2007) explains Paul’s argument in 3:10–12 as follows: The point that Paul wishes to convey is found in v. 10a; the quotations and v. 11a supply the four arguments, in two syllogisms (vv. 10b–11a and vv. 11b–12). Steve Moyise
3330 J. Willitts, “Context Matters: Paul’s Use of Leviticus 18:5 in Galatians 3:12”, Tyndale Bulletin 54:2 (2003), pp. 105–122.
https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.30256
(2008) offers a detailed overview of the two ways in which scholars explain Paul’s use of citations in 3:10–14. Some accept the truth of all the texts that Paul quotes, whereas others see an antithesis between what is said in Leviticus 18:5 and Deuteronomy 27:26 on the one hand and Habakkuk 2:4 on the other. Jean-Noël Aletti
3431 S. Grindheim, “Apostate Turned Prophet: Paul’s Prophetic Self-Understanding and Prophetic Hermeneutic with Special Reference to Galatians 3.10–12”, New Testament Studies 53:4 (2007), pp. 545–565.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688507000276
(2011) points out that scholars struggle to explain the logic of Paul’s argumentation in 3:10–14, and he offers the following solution: If one realises that Paul made use of the technique of gezerah shawoth (the explanation of one scriptural passage with the help of another in order to resolve apparent contradictions), his argument makes sense. Bruce Chilton
3532 M. Bachmann, “Zur Argumentation von Galater 3.10–12”, New Testament Studies 53:4 (2007), pp. 524–544.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688507000264
Also available in: M. Bachmann, Von Paulus zur Apokalypse – und weiter: Exegetische und rezeptionsgeschichtliche Studien zum Neuen Testament (samt englischsprachigen Summaries) (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus/Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 91, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), pp. 185‑205.
(2014) explains how Paul uses terms, allusions and quotations from LXX passages in 3:10–14 in order to prove his point. Chilton does so by focusing on two issues: references that can be identified and similarities at a linguistic level. According to Timothy G. Gombis
3633 S. Moyise, Evoking Scripture: Seeing the Old Testament in the New (London: T & T Clark, 2008), pp. 63–77.
(2014), 3:10–14 should be understood as a series of ad hoc arguments, based on Scripture and used by Paul to reveal that his opponents’ arguments were incoherent. He would not use the same argument in other nonpolemical contexts. G.N. Toryough and S.O. Okanlawon
3734 J.-N. Aletti, “L’argumentation de Ga 3,10–14, une fois encore: Difficultés et propositions”, Biblica 92:2 (2011), pp. 182–203. Also available in English in: J.-N. Aletti, New Approaches for Interpreting the Letters of Saint Paul: Collected Essays: Rhetoric, Soteriology, Christology and Ecclesiology: Translated from the French by Peggy Manning Meyer (Subsidia Biblica 43, Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2012), pp. 237‑260.
(2014) argue that, in the light of Genesis 12:1–3, the blessing that Paul refers to in 3:13–14 should be understood in a spiritual and not a material sense as many prosperity preachers tend to interpret it. It refers to the childhood of God. Debbie Hunn
3835 B. Chilton, “The Curse of the Law and the Blessing of Atonement: Paul’s Deployment of Septuagintal Language”, in: W. Kraus, S. Kreuzer, M. Meiser and M. Sigismund (eds.), Die Septuaginta: Text, Wirkung, Rezeption: 4. Internationale Fachtagung veranstaltet von Septuaginta Deutsch (LXX.D), Wuppertal 19.–22. Juli 2012 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum
(2016) is of the opinion that one should be aware of the fact that Paul introduces the notion of a metaphorical father-son relationship in 3:7. This helps one to follow his argument and his use of Scripture in 3:6–9. J. Andrew Cowan
39
Neuen Testament 1.325, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 597–610.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152890-3
(2020) objects to interpretations of 3:10–14 as referring to a corporate curse resting on Israel. Instead, Cowan interprets Paul’s use of Deuteronomy 27:26 anthropologically, but in a nuanced way, differing from earlier attempts to understand it anthropologically. Studies discussing all the quotations in 3:6-14Moisés Silva
4036 T.G. Gombis, “Arguing with Scripture in Galatia: Galatians 3:10–14 as a Series of ad hoc Arguments ”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 82–90.
(2001) raises the question of how and why Paul selected the quotations in this passage. Silva argues that Paul chose them as a result of the nature of the polemics in which he was engaged and not by a detached interpretation of the texts. In a detailed study of 3:1–14, Andrew H. Wakefield
4137 G.N. Toryough and S.O. Okanlawon, “The Blessing of Abraham: Seeking an Interpretive Link between Genesis 12:1–3 and Galatians 3:13–16”, Ilorin Journal of Religious Studies 4:1 (2014), pp. 123–136.
(2003) proposes that Paul’s use of the Hebrew Bible reflects an interest or matrix which Wakefield describes as “where to live”, i.e., that Paul urged the Galatians to live in the new age rather than the old age. 3:16Robby J. Kagarise
4238 D. Hunn, “Galatians 3:6–9: Abraham’s Fatherhood and Paul’s Conclusions”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 78:3 (2016), pp. 500–514.
(2000) disagrees with scholars who regard Paul’s use of texts from Genesis in this verse as problematic. According to Kagarise, Paul views the seed as referring to Christ in the light of the Christ-event. It is fulfilled in an individual (Christ) but also collectively (in all believers). C. John Collins
4339 J.A. Cowan, “The Curse of the Law, the Covenant, and Anthropology in Galatians 3:10–14: An Examination of Paul’s Use of Deuteronomy 27:26”, Journal of Biblical Literature 139:1 (2020), pp. 211–229.
https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1391.2020.11
(2003) explains Paul’s argument about “seeds” and “seed” in this verse as follows: Paul quoted Genesis 22:18 which referred to an individual person, interpreting it as a Messianic text, referring to Christ. Christian Metzenthin
4440 M. Silva, “Abraham, Faith, and Works: Paul’s Use of Scripture in Galatians 3:6–14”, The Westminster Theological Journal 63:2 (2001), pp. 251–267.
(2007) draws attention to similarities in the interpretation of Scripture between Paul and Qumran. Accordingly, Metzenthin suggests that 3:16 should be viewed as an allusion to Genesis 22:18.3:19–20According to J. Thomas Hewitt
4541 A.H. Wakefield, Where to Live: The Hermeneutical Significance of Paul’s Citations from Scripture in Galatians 3:1–14 (Academia Biblica 14, Atlanta GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003).
(2019), the expression ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τό σπέρμα (“until the offspring would come”) in 3:19 should be understood as a reappropriation of Genesis 49:10 – words that were often interpreted as Davidic/messianic. It thus makes sense that Paul applied it to Christ in 3:19. Linda L. Belleville
4642 R.J. Kagarise, “The ‘Seed’ in Galatians 3:16 – A Window to Paul’s Thinking”, Evangelical Journal 18:2 (2000), pp. 67–73.
(2019) thinks that the notions that the law was ordained through angels and by the hand of a mediator were so strongly entrenched in Sinai traditions that one should assume that they were echoes of Scripture. Furthermore, that Paul did not explain these statements when he introduced them in the letter should be taken as an indication that he assumed that his readers would be familiar with such notions.3:21According to Raik Heckl
4743 C.J. Collins, “Galatians 3:16: What Kind of Exegete Was Paul?”, Tyndale Bulletin 54:1 (2003), pp. 75–86.
https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.30224
(2003), Paul’s statement in 3:21b (“If a law had been given that could make alive …”) seems to allude to Deuteronomy 6:24–25 where life and justice are linked to the observance of the law.3:27In a book on Adam’s dust and glory in the Hodayot and Paul’s Letters, Nicholas A. Meyer
4844 C. Metzenthin, “Abraham in der Damaskusschrift und im Galaterbrief: Vergleichende Überlegungen zur Schriftauslegung”, Biblische Notizen 134 (2007), pp. 79–103.
(2016) refers to Paul’s statement on no longer male and female in 3:27. Meyer believes that this refers to Genesis 1:27 and that Paul claims that the earthly and mortal aspects of the image of God are transcended by participating in Christ.4:21–4:31/5:14:26According to Christl M. Maier
4945 J.T. Hewitt, “Ancient Messiah Discourse and Paul’s Expression ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τό σπέρμα in Galatians 3.19”, New Testament Studies 65:3 (2019), pp. 398–411.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0028688519000079
(2007), Psalm 87 should be viewed as a reappraisal of the Zion tradition. Furthermore, Maier thinks that Paul’s claim in this verse that Jerusalem is also the mother of the Gentiles is based on Psalm 86 LXX. 4:27Martinus C. de Boer
5046 L.L. Belleville, “The Sinai-μεσίτης Tradition in Galatians 3:19–20”, in: S.E. Porter and C.D. Land (eds.), Paul and Scripture (Pauline Studies 10, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2019), pp. 325–334.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391512_016
(2004) is of the view that Paul reflected on Isaiah 54:1 in the light of the crisis in Galatia and that this prompted his allegorical interpretation of the story in Genesis, in that the two women who are contrasted in Isaiah 54:1 provided him with an apocalyptic antinomy which helped him to find other pairs in the Genesis story which he could interpret in terms of a Christological and apocalyptic eschatology. Joel Willitts
5147 R. Heckl, “Ein Bezugstext für Gal 3:21b”, Novum Testamentum 45:3 (2003), pp. 260–264.
https://doi.org/10.1163/15685360360683280
(2005) contends that scholars wrongly assume that Paul interprets Genesis and the Abraham narrative in 4:21–5:1. Instead Willitts believes that Paul interprets Isaiah 54 and the narrative of Israel. Alicia D. Myers
5248 N.A. Meyer, Adam’s Dust and Adam’s Glory in the Hodayot and the Letters of Paul: Rethinking Anthropogony and Theology (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 168, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2016), pp. 95–104.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004322929
(2010) is of the opinion that one should understand Paul’s use of Isaiah 54:1 in this verse against his earlier appeals to the Hebrew Scriptures in Chapters 3 and 4. If this is done, it emerges that his quotation in this verse is part of a cumulative argument meant to persuade his readers that his mission to the non-Jews was prefigured in the Hebrew Scriptures. According to David I. Starling
5349 C.M. Maier, “Psalm 87 as a Reappraisal of the Zion Tradition and Its Reception in Galatians 4:26”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 69:3 (2007), pp. 473–486.
(2011), Paul’s use of Isaiah 54:1 in 4:27 is not explained sufficiently by the apocalyptic or Christological notions that he brings to the text, or even by the wider context of Isaiah. It should rather be understood in terms of a larger argument from Scripture that he uses in the letter. In another contribution, Starling
5450 M.C. de Boer, “Paul’s Quotation of Isaiah 54.1 in Galatians 4.27”, New Testament Studies 50:3 (2004), pp. 370–389.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688504000219
(2013) points out that Paul’s claim that “the Jerusalem above” is “our mother” (thus including uncircumcised believers in Galatia among Jerusalem’s children) makes sense if one reads the text that he provides as proof (Isaiah 54:1) in terms of the salvation-historical framework that he develops in previous parts in the letter. The contribution of Mark S. Gignilliat
5551 J. Willitts, “Isa 54,1 in Gal 4,24b: Reading Genesis in Light of Isaiah”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 96:3/4 (2005), pp. 188–210.
https://doi.org/10.1515/zntw.2005.96.3-4.188
(2015) is informed by developments in Isaianic research. In Isaiah 54–66, Abraham’s offspring is interpreted in terms of the servant’s offspring and in Galatians, Paul understands the quotation from Isaiah 54:1 in terms of the Isaianic offspring theology.4:30Susan G. Eastman
5652 A.D. Myers, “‘For It Has Been Written’: Paul’s Use of Isa 54:1 in Gal 4:27 in Light of Gal 3:1–5:1”, Perspectives in Religious Studies 37:3 (2010), pp. 295–308.
(2006) disagrees with scholars who interpret this verse as implying that Jews are excluded from salvation or as urging the Galatians to expel the opponents. Eastman believes that Paul is rather letting the Galatians listen to Scripture announcing the gospel to Abraham (as happens in 3:8), thus emphasising God’s faithfulness.Studies discussing 4:21–4:31/5:1 as a whole Torsten Löfstedt
5753 D.I. Starling, Not My People: Gentiles as Exiles in Pauline Hermeneutics (Beiheft zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 184, Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011), pp. 23–60.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110259612
(2000) describes Paul’s exegetical strategy in this pericope as “allegory”, but stresses that Paul used it in a restrained way. Löfstedt also highlights the fact that the deeper meaning that Paul found in this instance was connected to Christ. In the light of the problematic Wirkungsgeschichte of this pericope, Angela Standhartinger
5854 D.I. Starling, “The Children of the Barren Woman: Galatians 4:27 and the Hermeneutics of Justification”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 3:1 (2013), pp. 93–109.
(2002) discusses Paul’s handling of Hagar. Standhartinger identifies three steps in Paul’s argumentation: (1) juxtapositioning the free born son of the promise with the fleshly son of Hagar (vv. 21–23); (2) seeking for a deeper meaning underlying the events by using the concept “Jerusalem above” and a citation of Isaiah 54:1 to “blend” the two women (vv. 24–27); and (3) an argument to “drive out” Hagar, i.e., a call to practise the freedom shared by Jews and people of all nations jointly (vv. 28–31). Daniel Gerber
5955 M.S. Gignilliat, “Isaiah’s Offspring: Paul’s Isaiah 54:1 Quotation in Galatians 4:27”, Bulletin for Biblical Research 25:2 (2015), pp. 205–223.
(2002) describes Paul’s exegetical strategy in this pericope as a typological construction based on an arbitrary allegorical foundation – an exegetical tour de force caused by anger rather than reason. According to Jeremy Punt
6056 S.G. Eastman, “‘Cast out the Slave Woman and Her Son’: The Dynamics of Exclusion and Inclusion in Galatians 4.30”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 28:3 (2006), pp. 309–336.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X06063245
(2007), Sarah’s position as mother of the Jews is subverted in this chapter and in 1 Peter. Instead, she becomes a model of Christian faith and is depicted in this way to further the persuasive goals of the two authors. Mary Mills
6157 T. Löfstedt, “The Allegory of Hagar and Sarah: Gal 4.21–31”, Estudios Bíblicos 58:4 (2000), pp. 475–494.
(2008) describes Paul’s exegetical strategy in this pericope as an imaginative interpretation of events narrated in the Hebrew Scriptures with Abraham serving as prototype. This is supported by an allegorical reading of Sarah and Hagar in such a way that everything is creatively focused on Christ. In a next step, Mills utilises narrative criticism to imaginatively interpret Sarah and Hagar (in Genesis) as models of identity. Mark Gignilliat
6258 A. Standhartinger, “‘Zur Freiheit ... befreit’? Hagar im Galaterbrief”, Evangelische Theologie 62:4 (2002), pp. 288–303.
(2008) uses this passage to illustrate that Paul’s exegetical strategy fits in well with the way in which the Bible, in particular the Hebrew Scriptures, was read figuratively in the exegetical tradition. It confirms that the Bible should be read in the light of its subject matter, Christ. Ladislav Tichý
6359 D. Gerber, “Ga 4,21–31 ou l’indéfinissable méthode?”, in: R. Kuntzmann (ed.), Typologie biblique: De quelques figures vives (Lectio Divina, Paris: Cerf, 2002), pp. 165–176.
(2009) prefers to describe Paul’s rhetorical strategy in this pericope as typology rather than allegory, since Paul does not deny that events narrated in Genesis happened. Furthermore, Tichý emphasises that Paul’s exegetical approach was decisively influenced by his faith in Christ. A.B. Caneday
6460 J. Punt, “Subverting Sarah in the New Testament: Galatians 4 and 1 Peter 3”, Scriptura 96 (2007), pp. 453–468.
https://doi.org/10.7833/96-0-1168
(2010) contends that the Genesis text that Paul used upheld the authenticity of events that were narrated, but that it also had an allegorical side and that this warranted Paul’s argument in this pericope. Bas van Os
6561 M. Mills, “The Story of Abraham and Models of Human Identity”, New Blackfriars 89:1021 (2008), pp. 280–299.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2005.2008.00221.x
(2010) explains the way in which Paul linked Sarah in this pericope to the New Jerusalem of Isaiah 54:1, how early Christians re-interpreted this prophecy in Isaiah in the light of the fact that Gentiles formed the majority in the Christian movement in their times, how Gnostic Christians (in particular, according to the Gospel of Philip) interpreted the Isaiah text allegorically, and how Irenaeus reacted to the claim that non-Gnostic Christians were children of the slave woman. Dieter Sänger
6662 M. Gignilliat, “Paul, Allegory, and the Plain Sense of Scripture: Galatians 4:21–31”, Journal of Theological Interpretation 2:1 (2008), pp. 135–146.
https://doi.org/10.2307/jtheointe.2.1.0135
(2011) describes Paul’s interpretative strategy in this pericope as Christian identity formation by means of “Namenallegorese” (i.e., the allegorisation of names). In the first part, Paul develops metaphorical contrasts antithetically, and in the second part, he constructs Christian identity narratively, in particular by focusing on the liberty that is based on Christ and that is experienced by means of faith. Joseph Hyung S. Lee
6763 L. Tichý, “Biblické Argumenty Apoštola Pavla v Gal 4,21–31”, Studia Theologica 38:4 (2009), pp. 1–14.
(2013) describes Paul’s use of Scripture as “apocalyptic allegory” and explains his use of Genesis and Isaiah in terms of three perspectives: intertextuality, the use of a historical narrative, and an apocalyptic perspective. Matthew Y. Emerson
6864 A.B. Caneday, “Covenant Lineage Allegorically Prefigured: ‘Which Things Are Written Allegorically’ (Galatians 4:21–31)”, The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 14:3 (2010), pp. 50–77.
(2013) argues that if one reads Paul’s argument in 4:21–5:1 from the perspective of intertextuality, it becomes clear that the Hagar and Sinai narratives are closely related and that Paul interpreted them appropriately. Matthew S. Harmon
6965 B. van Os, “Children of the Slave Woman: The Gnostic Christian Reinterpretation of Paul’s Allegory of Hagar”, in: M. Goodman, G.H. van Kooten and J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten (eds.), Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham (Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions 13, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2010), pp. 387–400.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004188433.i-578.127
(2014) interprets the verb ἀλληγορέω (“speak allegorically”) in this pericope as referring to something having a deeper meaning. Paul thus perceived a deeper meaning in Genesis 16–21 which only became clear by looking at it through Isaiah 54:1. Yongbom Lee’s
7066 D. Sänger, “Sara, die Freie – unsere Mutter: Namenallegorese als Interpretament christlicher Identitätsbildung in Gal 4,21–31”, in: R. Deines, J. Herzer and K.-W. Niebuhr (eds.), Neues Testament und
(2015) study focuses on Paul’s knowledge and use of the Jesus tradition. One of the passages that is discussed is 4:21–5:1. In this case, Lee points out that Paul interpreted the LXX in more or less the same way as it happens in some of the Qumran writings. David I. Starling
71
III. Internationales Symposium zum Corpus Judaeo-Hellenisticum Novi Testamenti, 21.–24. Mai 2009, Leipzig (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.274, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), pp. 213–239. hellenistich-jüdische Alltagskultur: Wechselseitige Wahrnehmungen:
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151563-7
(2015) identifies the following six warrants on which Paul’s allegory in this pericope is based: Genesis, Isaiah, Israel’s story, Christology and eschatology, the Galatians’ own experience and Paul’s authority as apostle and founder of the congregation. Starling emphasises that Paul’s allegorisation was not speculative and does not give us the right to make use of speculative allegorisation. One of the issues that Robert C. Gregg
7267 J.H.S. Lee, “Apocalyptic Allegory: Paul’s Use of Genesis and Isaiah in Galatians 4:19–5:1”, in: H.C. Kim (ed.), Galatians as Examined by Diverse Academics in 2012 (St. Andrews, Scotland) (Hermit Kingdom Studies in Christianity and Judaism 3, Newark NJ/Seoul: The Hermit Kingdom Press, 2013), pp. 42–56.
(2015) discusses in a study of narratives shared by Jews, Christians and Muslims is the story of Sarah and Hagar. Gregg describes Paul’s allegory as “bold” and “idiosyncratic”. He used it for the radical claim that “the covenant blessing God first bestowed upon Abraham and his successors … had passed from the Jews to the new community.”
7368 M.Y. Emerson, “Arbitrary Allegory, Typical Typology, or Intertextual Interpretation? Paul’s Use of the Pentateuch in Galatians 4:21–31”, Biblical Theology Bulletin 43:1 (2013), pp. 14–22.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146107912470332
In a study of the history of reception of Genesis 21 in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity, Gudrun Holtz
7469 M.S. Harmon, “Allegory, Typology, or Something Else: Revisiting Galatians 4:21–5:1”, in: M.S. Harmon and J.E. Smith (eds.), Studies in the Pauline Epistles: Essays in Honor of Douglas J. Moo (Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan, 2014), pp. 144–158.
(2017) discusses this pericope. Although it does not presuppose a virginial conception, Abraham’s role in Isaac’s conception is not mentioned but God’s power is stressed, since Isaac is depicted as a son according to the Spirit. Elitzur A. Bar-Asher Siegal and
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal
7570 Y. Lee, Paul, Scribe of Old and New: Intertextual Insights for the Jesus-Paul Debate (Library of New Testament Studies 512, London/New York NY: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2015).
(2018) think that the whole argument in 4:21–31 is based on the quotation from Isaiah 54:1, but argue that one should realise that Paul understood be‛ûlâh in the late-Hebrew sense of “a woman who had sexual intercourse”. This implies that he might have understood šômêmâl as meaning “a woman who did not have intercourse”. Kathryn Greene-McCreight
7671 D.I. Starling, “Justifying Allegory: Scripture, Rhetoric, and Reason in Galatians 4:21–5:1”, Journal of Theological Interpretation 9:2 (2015), pp. 227–245.
https://doi.org/10.2307/jtheointe.9.2.0227
(2020) interprets Paul’s handling of the narratives of Sarah and Hagar in 4:21–31 as a “figuring in” whereby Paul guides his readers into the Christological and ecclesial scopes of the narratives. In this way, he focuses their attention on important themes in the letter: seed, spiritual inheritance and Christian identity. According to Samuel J. Tedder
7772 R.C. Gregg, Shared Stories, Rival Tellings: Early Encounters of Jews, Christians and Muslims (New York NY/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 117–216.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190231491.001.0001
(2020), this pericope is central to Paul’s argument in the letter. Tedder prefers to describe Paul’s approach as essentially intertextual in that he grounds his interpretation of the gospel in the Hebrew Scriptures as they have been reconfigured by the coming of Christ. For Paul, the “Jerusalem above” was the inaugurated restoration reality characterised by the rule and presence of God.5:14Michael K.W. Suh
7873 Op. cit., p. 218.
(2012) proposes that Paul’s quotation of Leviticus 19:18 in this verse resonates with the larger context of this chapter in Leviticus. Leviticus 19 connects the commandments to the Lord himself, and similarly, in this verse, Jesus’ identity is described in a way parallel to that of the Lord in Leviticus.5:16, 18William N. Wilder
7974 G. Holtz, Jungfrauengeburt und Greisinnengeburt: Zur Rezeptionsgeschichte von Gen 21,1f im antiken Judentum und im frühen Christentum (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 172, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), pp. 83–92.
(2001) believes that this verse indicates that Paul understood Christian experience as a new exodus. Furthermore, Psalm 143 served as the source of Paul’s ideas in this regard, for both Paul’s views of the new exodus and the flesh-Spirit contrast in this part of the letter. Scott A. Swanson
8075 E.A. Bar-Asher Siegal and M. Bar-Asher Siegal, “The Hebrew-Based Traditions in Galatians 4:21–31”, Early Christianity 9:4 (2018), pp. 404–431.
https://doi.org/10.1628/ec-2018-0030
(2018) is of the opinion that Psalm 143:10 lies behind Paul’s exhortations to walk by the Spirit and be led by the Spirit (5:16, 18 and Romans 8:14). This presupposes a wisdom framework that one has to take seriously in order to understand this facet of Paul’s instruction on the Spirit properly.5:22According to G.K. Beale
8176 K. Greene-McCreight, “Figured In: Nonliteral Reading, the Rule of Faith, and Galatians 4”, in: D. Collett, M. Elliott, M. Gignilliat and E. Radner (eds.), The Identity of Israel’s God in Christian Scripture: Essays in Honor of Christopher R. Seitz (Resources for Biblical Study 96, Atlanta GA: SBL Press, 2020), pp. 339–352.
(2005), the notion of “the fruit of the Spirit” (5:22) is an allusion to promises in Isaiah (especially in Chapters 32 and 57) about the abundant fertility characteristic of the new age, brought about by the Spirit.
1.3 Studies discussing the use of themes from the Hebrew Scriptures in the letter
C. Marvin Pate
8277 S.J. Tedder, Children of Laughter and the Re-Creation of Humanity: The Theological Vision and Logic of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2020).
(2000) maintains that Paul viewed Christ as the Wisdom of God who had removed the Deuteronomic curses through his death on the cross. The blessings of the covenant thus rested on believers whereas the curses of the covenant remained on those who try to keep the law. Pamela Eisenbaum
8378 M.K.W. Suh, “‘It Has Been Brought to Completion’: Leviticus 19:18 as Christological Witness in Galatians 5:14”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 2:2 (2012), pp. 115–132.
(2000) believes that Paul experienced his call not so much as similar to that of the prophets, but rather as similar to that of Abraham. He thus regarded himself as the new Abraham, establishing a new type of family. Susan Eastman
8479 W.N. Wilder, Echoes of the Exodus Narrative in the Context and Background of Galatians 5:18 (Studies in Biblical Literature 23, New York/Bern: Lang, 2001).
(2001) explains Paul’s reference to the evil eye by means of the Hebrew Bible. It should be seen as an intertextual echo to the curse mentioned in Deuteronomy 28:53–57, thus preparing for Paul’s depiction of the crucified Christ as the antidote to the curse brought by the law in the rest of Chapter 3 and the portrayal of the gospel as a free mother (in Chapter 4). In a discussion of the way in which Paul uses the stories of Israel in Romans and Galatians, Bruce W. Longenecker
8580 S.A. Swanson, “The Instruction of the Spirit: The Wisdom Framework for Pauline Spirit Dependence”, Mid-America Journal of Theology 29 (2018), pp. 81–128.
(2002) points out certain stable features in the way in which Paul uses these stories but also notes differences between the two letters. In Romans, the relationship between Gentile believers and Israel is depicted as organic, but in Galatians, Paul tries to sever this organic relationship between Israel and Gentile believers. In the same volume, there is also a contribution by Andrew T. Lincoln
8681 G.K. Beale, “The Old Testament Background of Paul’s Reference to ‘the Fruit of the Spirit’ in Galatians 5:22”, Bulletin for Biblical Research 15:1 (2005), pp. 1–38.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26422749
(2002) on the stories of predecessors and inheritors in Galatians and Romans. With regard to predecessors, Lincoln points out that the narrative of Abraham is crucial for Paul’s understanding of the identity of God’s people, and that Paul focuses in both letters on the elements in the narrative supporting his perspective. Marinko Vidović
8782 C.M. Pate, The Reverse of the Curse: Paul, Wisdom, and the Law (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.114, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157167-1
(2003) offers an overview of the way in which Paul depicts Abraham in Galatians, as a person showing the kind of faith that he expects of the Galatians. Nancy Calvert-Koyzis
8883 P. Eisenbaum, “Paul as the New Abraham”, in: R.A. Horsley (ed.), Paul and Politics: Ekklesia, Israel, Imperium, Interpretation: Essays in Honor of Krister Stendahl (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press, 2000), pp. 130–145. See also the response by Alan F. Segal: “Response: Some Aspects of Conversion and Identity Formation in the Christian Community of Paul’s Time”, in: R.A. Horsley (ed.), Paul and Politics: Ekklesia, Israel, Imperium, Interpretation: Essays in Honor of Krister Stendahl (Harrisburg PA: Trinity Press, 2000), pp. 184–190.
(2004) argues that the most prevalent tradition about Abraham, namely his rejection of idolatry in favour of monotheistic faith, forms the background of Paul’s argument on him, in that Paul regards obedience to the law as a form of idolatry that was to be rejected in favour of faith in the true God. Todd A. Wilson
8984 S. Eastman, “The Evil Eye and the Curse of the Law: Galatians 3.1 Revisited”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 24:1 (2001), pp. 69–87.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0102400104
(2004) claims that Paul uses the theme of Israel’s wilderness apostasy in Galatians. Thus, the Galatians are depicted as being on the verge of a wilderness apostasy, somewhere between redemption (as happened in Exodus) and inheriting the kingdom of God. Günther H. Juncker
9085 B.W. Longenecker, “Sharing in Their Spiritual Blessings? The Stories of Israel in Galatians and Romans”, in: B.W. Longenecker (ed.), Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2002), pp. 58–84. See also the response by Morna D. Hooker: “‘Heirs of Abraham’: The Gentiles’ Role in Israel’s Story: A Reponse to Bruce W. Longenecker”, in: B.W. Longenecker (ed.), Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2002), pp. 85–96. Richard Hays’s response is available in: “Is Paul’s Gospel Narratable?”, Journal for
(2007) interprets “Israel” in Romans 9:6b as referring to the spiritual Israel (i.e., the church) and not to a faithful remnant from Israel. Juncker finds a similar tendency in Paul’s depiction of Abraham as spiritual father in Galatians 3, in the typological interpretations of the patriarchs in Galatians 3 and in the typology of Isaac and Ishmael in 4:21–31. According to Troy A. Miller
91
27:2 (2004), pp. 217–239. the Study of the New Testament
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0402700205
(2009), in 4:21–31, Paul subverts the traditional negative Jewish interpretation of Hagar (a view probably stemming from his opponents). It is thus not the case that he presents a negative interpretation of Hagar in the letter. Karin B. Neutel
9286 A.T. Lincoln, “The Stories of Predecessors and Inheritors in Galatians and Romans”, in: B.W. Longenecker (ed.), Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2002), pp. 172–203. See also the response by I. Howard Marshall: “Response to A.T. Lincoln: The Stories of Predecessors and Inheritors in Galatians and Romans”, in: B.W. Longenecker (ed.), Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2002), pp. 204–214. Richard Hays’s response is available in: “Is Paul’s Gospel Narratable?”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 27:2 (2004), pp. 217–239.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0402700205
(2010) explains the way in which Paul understands Abraham as universal ancestor in Galatians as follows: Through Christ’s death and resurrection, a new era has been inaugurated in which God no longer distinguishes between Jews and Gentiles. Access to God is thus universal and both Jews and Gentiles are God’s children. Roy E. Ciampa
9387 M. Vidović, “Abrahamov Lik u Argumentiranju Spasenja po Vjeri u Poslanici Galaćanima”, Bogoslovska Smotra 73:4 (2003), pp. 533–575.
(2010) points out that there are indications in the Hebrew Scriptures and early Christian traditions that Abraham was associated with liberation from various kinds of oppression. Ciampa then shows how Paul associates Abraham in Galatians, not only with spiritual liberation but also with liberation from other oppressive situations. One of the issues that Steve Moyise
9488 N. Calvert-Koyzis, Paul, Monotheism and the People of God: The Significance of Abraham Traditions for Early Judaism and Christianity (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplements 273, London: T & T International, 2004).
(2010) discusses in a book on Paul’s use of the Hebrew Scriptures is how he interprets Abraham. Moyise shows how Paul’s interpretation of Abraham sometimes agrees and sometimes disagrees with other interpretations of Abraham in the first century. Paul focuses on Genesis 15:6, highlighting faith as the identity marker of God’s people, and also draws novel conclusions from the narratives about the two sons of Abraham. Oda Wischmeyer
9589 T.A. Wilson, “Wilderness Apostasy and Paul’s Portrayal of the Crisis in Galatians”, New Testament Studies 50:4 (2004), pp. 550–571.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688504000311
(2010) proposes that Paul did not link Abraham primarily to the history of Israel but rather viewed him as an exemplary figure in a general anthropological sense: the human being whose relationship to God was constituted by faith. Matthew S. Harmon
9690 G.H. Juncker, “‘Children of Promise’: Spiritual Paternity and Patriarch Typology in Galatians and Romans”, Bulletin for Biblical Research 17:1 (2007), pp. 131–160.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26424196
(2010) highlights the influence of the Book of Isaiah (primarily Chapters 40–66) on Galatians. Amongst other things, Harmon points out similarities between Paul’s self-understanding and the depiction of the Servant in Isaiah. Gordon D. Fee
9791 T.A. Miller, “Surrogate, Slave and Deviant? The Figure of Hagar in Jewish Tradition and Paul (Galatians 4.21–31)”, in: C.A. Evans and H.D. Zacharias (eds.), Early Christian Literature and Intertextuality: Volume 2: Exegetical Studies (Library of New Testament Studies 392, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2009), pp. 138–154.
(2010) traces the role of Abraham in Pauline argumentation. Fee points out that it seems as if the problems caused by Paul’s opponents in Galatia led him to focus on Abraham, in particular, the fact that Abraham had faith in God before he was circumcised. Rodrigo J. Morales
9892 K.B. Neutel, “‘Neither Jew nor Greek’: Abraham as Universal Ancestor”, in: M. Goodman, G.H. van Kooten and J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten (eds.), Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham (Themes in Biblical Narrative 13, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2010), pp. 289–306.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004216495_020
(2010) discusses the importance of the themes of the new exodus, new creation and the restoration of Israel in Galatians. According to Morales, Paul regarded the gift of the Spirit as a fulfilment of God’s promise to restore Israel. Furthermore, Paul followed Deutero-Isaiah by linking the Spirit to the blessing of Abraham and the inclusion of the Gentiles. One of the aspects that Gary M. Burge
9993 R.E. Ciampa, “Abraham and Empire in Galatians”, in: S.A. Hunt (ed.), Perspectives on Our Father Abraham: Essays in Honor of Marvin R. Wilson (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: 2010), pp. 153–168.
(2010) discusses in a book on how the New Testament challenges Holy Land theology is Paul’s interpretation of the promises to Abraham. Burge points out how Paul universalises the promises to Abraham in Romans and Galatians to include all people and every land. Ulrike Bechmann
10094 S. Moyise, Paul and Scripture: Studying the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids MI/London: Baker/SPCK, 2010), pp. 31–45.
(2011) explains how Paul uses Abraham and Sarah in Galatians and Romans as figures of “unbounding” (“Entgrenzung”). In 4:21–31, Sarah is associated with spiritual liberty and faith, thereby connecting Christ, the centre of Christian faith, with the Jewish tradition of salvation and promise. According to Maureen W. Yeung
10195 O. Wischmeyer, “Wie kommt Abraham in den Galaterbrief? Überlegungen zu Gal 3,6–29”, in: M. Bachmann and B. Kollmann (eds.), Umstrittener Galaterbrief: Studien zur Situierung und Theologie des Paulus-Schreibens (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 106, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2010), pp. 119–163.
(2011), the three paradoxes inherent in the expressions “the seed of Abraham” (3:16, 29), “the law of Christ” (6:2) and “the Israel of God” (6:16) are genuine paradoxes. They were already implicit in the Hebrew Scriptures and Paul merely developed them within his missionary context. Jeremy Punt published several articles commenting on the way in which Paul uses Abraham traditions in Galatians: In the first one, Punt
10296 M.S. Harmon, She Must and Shall Go Free: Paul’s Isaianic Gospel in Galatians (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 168, Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010).
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110221763
(2011) draws attention to the way in which Paul uses the Abraham narrative in Genesis 16 and 21 in 4:21–5:1 for the identity formation of Jesus followers. Paul’s hermeneutics thus supports identity formation, and reciprocally, his view of believers’ identity in Christ determined his hermeneutics. In a second contribution, Punt
10397 G.D. Fee, “Who Are Abraham’s True Children? The Role of Abraham in Pauline Argumentation”, in: S.A. Hunt (ed.), Perspectives on Our Father Abraham: Essays in Honor of Marvin R. Wilson (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2010), pp. 126–137.
(2012) discusses Paul’s use of the Abraham narratives in Galatians and Romans from the perspective of cultural memory. By linking three elements (the contemporised past, culture and the group/community) the way in which Paul uses Scriptures to negotiate the identity of a particular group of Jesus followers is clarified. A third contribution
10498 R.J. Morales, The Spirit and the Restoration of Israel: New Exodus and New Creation Motifs in Galatians (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.282, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151625-2
(2013) focuses on the way in which Paul uses texts from the Hebrew Scriptures, in particular from the Abraham narrative, to construct notions of Others within the context of the Roman Empire and its identity politics. In this way, Paul clearly draws boundaries, thus creating insiders and outsiders. In another contribution in 2013, Punt
10599 G.M. Burge, Jesus and the Land: The New Testament Challenge to “Holy Land” Theology (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2010), pp. 77–94.
shows how Paul goes about creating “Others” in the letter by using the Hebrew Scriptures. He and his addressees are depicted as children of the promise (like Isaac). They are also linked to Sarah and distanced from Hagar. In the fifth study, Punt
106100 U. Bechmann, “Rhetorische Figuren der Entgrenzung: Abraham, Sara und Hagar bei Paulus”, Bibel und Kirche 66:1 (2011), pp. 9–14.
(2014) investigates the interplay between the way in which Paul uses the depiction of Abraham in the Hebrew Scriptures in Galatians to negotiate identity within an imperial setting. Punt shows that Paul’s othering of people in the letter was affected by the imperial setup and the way in which the Roman Empire scripted power. According to Peter Wick
107101 M.W. Yeung, “Old Testament Paradoxes in Galatians: Rethinking the Theology of Galatians”, in: J.C. Laansma, G.R. Osborne and R.F. van Neste (eds.), New Testament Theology in Light of the Church’s Mission: Essays in Honor of I. Howard Marshall (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2011), pp. 213–228.
(2013), 4:21–31 serves as the climax of Paul’s argument in Galatians and introduces the actual reason for the letter: the prohibition of circumcision for all who have come to faith in Christ. Paul argues that believers who wish to be circumcised have switched to a different spiritual mother, city and covenant. Sigve K. Tonstad
108102 J. Punt, “Hermeneutics in Identity Formation: Paul’s Use of Genesis in Galatians 4”, HTS Teologiese Studies 67:1 (2011), pp. 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v67i1.846
(2013) thinks that, whereas Paul’s opponents regarded Abraham as the primary proof of their message on circumcision, his interpretation of Abraham was based on apocalyptic notions and the Akedah. This is expressed primarily by the call “Abba! Father” (4:6). Finn Damgaard
109103 J. Punt, “Identity, Memory, and Scriptural Warrant: Arguing Paul’s Case”, in: C.D. Stanley (ed.), Paul and Scripture: Extending the Conversation (Early Christianity and Its Literature 9, Atlanta GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012), pp. 25–54.
(2013) discusses the way in which Moses was “recast” in narratives in ancient Judaism and fourth century Christianity. Damgaard argues that Paul uses Moses in his writings in an autobiographical way and Adam and Abraham in a theological way. According to Mireia Ryšková
110104 J. Punt, “The Interpretation of the New Testament as the Study of Texts and Contexts: Hermeneutics, Identities, Communities”, Acta Theologica 33:2 (2013), pp. 113–132.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2.7
(2013), Paul uses the Abrahamic tradition in the controversy with his Jewish Christian opponents without paying attention to the halachic dimensions of the tradition. Instead, he interprets it from the perspective of redemption in Christ. Fanie (S.D.) Snyman
111105 J. Punt, “‘The Others’ in Galatians: Text and the Negotiation of Identity”, in: F. Lozada Jr. and G. Carey (eds.), Soundings in Cultural Criticism: Perspectives and Methods in Culture, Power and Identity in the New Testament (Minneapolis MI: Fortress Press, 2013), pp. 45–54.
(2014) compares the portrayal of Abraham in Galatians and Genesis. In each of the passages in Genesis that is investigated, the emphasis falls primarily on one of the three promises (land, progeny and blessing), but in Galatians, the emphasis is mostly on the blessing. Jane Heath
112106 J. Punt, “Identity Claims, Texts, Rome and Galatians”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 19 (2014), pp. 81–104.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2S.5
(2014) discusses the relationship between God as Father and other parents in the New Testament. In the case of Galatians, the relationship between God as Father and Abraham as (spiritual) father is important. God’s fatherhood took shape in history in his Son (the seed of Abraham) and in those who believe in his Son, so that the relationship to God through his Son became the focus of unity for humankind. Kateřina Kočí
113107 P. Wick, “Das himmlische Jerusalem in Gal 4,21–31 oder: Die Mutter macht den Unterschied: Antiethische Polarität als Matrix im Galaterbrief”, Theologische Zeitschrift 69:4 (2013), pp. 320–337.
https://doi.org/10.5169/seals-877669
(2014) points out that the term “promise” does not always refer to the same thing in Romans and Galatians. It may refer to general promises to Abraham, promises to Abraham’s offspring, the Spirit and inheriting the world. Furthermore, Kočí shows that the promise of the land is generally spiritualised and eschatologised by Paul. In a study on Romans 9, Robert B. Foster
114108 S.K. Tonstad, “Inscribing Abraham: Apocalyptic, the Akedah, and ‘Abba! Father’ in Galatians”, in: H.C. Kim (ed.), Galatians as Examined by Diverse Academics in 2012 (St. Andrews, Scotland) (Hermit Kingdom Studies in Christianity and Judaism 3, Newark NJ/Seoul: The Hermit Kingdom Press, 2013), pp. 15-28.
(2016) highlights the way in which Paul reconfigured Abrahamic identity in Galatians. He reinterpreted the founding story of Israel in Genesis, thereby creating a new religious identity for the Galatian believers. Ari Mermelstein
115109 F. Damgaard, Recasting Moses: The Memory of Moses in Biographical and Autobiographical Narratives in Ancient Judaism and 4th-Century Christianity (Early Christianity in the Context of Antiquity 13, Frankfurt am Main/Berlin/Bern: Peter Lang, 2013), pp. 112–120.
(2017) investigates the way in which the covenant with Abraham was retold in five texts: the Damascus Document, the Apocalypse of the Weeks, 4 Ezra, Nehemiah 9 and Galatians. Paul did not use it to support exclusivist claims but to argue for an inclusive community. Todd A. Wilson
116110 M. Ryšková, “Abrahamic Tradition in the Epistle to the Galatians”, Acta Universitatis Carolinae Theologica 3:2 (2013), pp. 115–133.
https://doi.org/10.14712/23363398.2015.27
(2017) illustrates intertextual exegesis by identifying echoes of the exodus narrative in 5:16–23 related to the wilderness theme, such as the guidance of the Spirit (echoing the guidance of Israel by a cloud) and “the fruit of the Spirit” (echoing the prophetic hopes of the fruitfulness of Israel). Seung Hyun Lee
117111 S.D. Snyman, “Abraham in Galatians and in Genesis”, Acta Theologica 33:2 (2014), pp. 148–163.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2.9
(2018) compares Paul’s and Philo’s understanding of Abraham, the conversion of the Gentiles and God’s Spirit. According to Lee, both Philo and Paul believed that it was God’s Spirit who enabled one to realise that Gentile religion was futile. However, unlike Philo, Paul understood faith as to be focused only on God’s Son. In a book on the Land of Israel traditions in ancient Jewish, Christian and Samaritan literature, Ze’ev Safrai
118112 J. Heath, “God the Father and Other Parents in the New Testament”, in: F. Albrecht and R. Feldmeier (eds.), The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity (Themes in Biblical Narrative 18, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 233–254.
(2018) also refers to Galatians. In this letter, Paul opposed a connection between the Jews and the land. The offspring of Abraham were the believers, not the Jews. According to Dong-Su Seo
119113 K. Kočí, “Reception of the ‘Promised Land’ in the Pauline Letters”, Communio Viatorum 56:1 (2014), pp. 35–55.
(2019), Paul’s reference to the blessing of Abraham in 3:13–14 should be understood in terms of Abraham’s role as the unifying archetype of humankind. In him, Jews and Gentiles are united in Christ. Esau McCaulley
120114 R.B. Foster, Renaming Abraham’s Children: Election, Ethnicity, and the Interpretation of Scripture in Romans 9 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.421, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016), pp. 50–63.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-154484-2
(2019) disagrees with scholars who think that Paul replaced the notion of the promised land with salvation or the Spirit as gift from God. McCaulley is of the opinion that Paul rather expanded the notion of the promised land to cover the whole earth, since Jesus – the Seed of Abraham and of David – was entitled to the whole world. Peter Cimala
121115 A. Mermelstein, “When History Repeats Itself: The Theological Significance of the Abrahamic Covenant in Early Jewish Writings”, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 27:2 (2017), pp. 113–142.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0309089217746847
(2020) interprets 5:1 in the light of the new exodus motif found in the book Isaiah. Like Isaiah, Paul hoped for universal salvation, including both Jews and Gentiles. In this sense, he thus preached a “new exodus”.One of the issues that Chris Bruno, Jared Compton and Kevin McFadden
122116 T.A. Wilson, “Scripting and the Rhetoric of Wilderness in Galatians”, in: T.A. Wilson and P.R. House (eds.), The Crucified Apostle: Essays on Peter and Paul (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.450, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), pp. 245–260.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155610-4
(2020) address in a study on the ways in which the earliest Christians told the story of Israel is the depiction of the law in Galatians. They show how Paul argues in Galatians 3 and 4 that the law was never intended to be the climax of Israel’s story. It had a secondary role and was meant to be temporary and preparatory only. John Eifion Morgan-Wynne
123117 S.H. Lee, “A Comparison between Paul and Philo’s Understanding of Abraham, the Conversion of Gentiles and the Spirit of God”, 신약논단 25:3 (2018), pp. 795–830.
(2020) discusses Abraham in the New Testament. In the case of Galatians, Morgan-Wynne points out that Paul linked the promise to Abraham to Jesus’ death and resurrection as well as to the coming of the Spirit, with Abraham depicted as a prototype of how God deals with humankind. Furthermore, Paul redefined the notion of descendants of Abraham and also made a sharp distinction between law and promise. According to Nélida Naveros Córdova
124118 Z. Safrai, Seeking out the Land: Land of Israel Traditions in Ancient Jewish, Christian and Samaritan Literature (200 BCE–400 CE) (Jewish and Christian Perspectives Series 32, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2018), pp. 240–241.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004334823
(2020), Paul’s view of the Spirit was primarily influenced by the LXX and a development in his view of the role of the Spirit in ethics can be detected. In his early letters, the Spirit was depicted as preeminent, but in his later letters, it became the font of all the virtues. In Galatians, he also challenged fundamental Jewish ideas, for example by opposing the Spirit and the law and by associating the Spirit with virtues and flesh with vices.
1.4 Studies discussing the matter from the perspective of the Hebrew Scriptures
In a contribution on Paul’s use of Second Isaiah in Galatians, Martinus C. de Boer
125119 D.-S. Seo, “The Theological Implications of Abraham as a Prototype of Unification of the Human Race in Light of the Multiracial and Multicultural Context of Galatians 3:14”, 신약논단 26:1 (2019), pp. 177–214.
https://doi.org/10.31982/knts.2019.3.26.1.177
(2002) argues that there are clear indications that Paul knew Second Isaiah and that he used insights from it to formulate his own apocalyptic eschatology. De Boer discusses 1:15–16, 4:19, 21–5:1 and 6:15. Sylvia C. Keesmaat
126120 E. McCaulley, Sharing in the Son’s Inheritance: Davidic Messianism and Paul’s Worldwide Interpretation of the Abrahamic Land Promise in Galatians (Library of New Testament Studies 608, London: T & T Clark, 2019).
(2004) focuses on Paul’s use of the Book of Psalms in Romans and Galatians. In the case of Galatians, Keesmaat draws attention to two allusions to the Psalms (Psalm 143:2 in Galatians 2:16 and Psalm 89 in Galatians 3:16). In both cases, Keesmaat finds evidence supporting the notion that Paul viewed Christ as the Messiah, thereby challenging both imperial paganism and nationalistic Judaism. In a contribution on Paul’s use of Isaiah in Romans and Galatians, J. Ross Wagner
127121 P. Cimala, “‘Do Not Submit Again to a Yoke of Slavery’: Liberation in Christ as a ‘New Exodus’ in Paul’s Letter to Galatians”, in: J. Roskovec and V. Hušek (eds.), Interactions in Interpetation: The Pilgrimage of Meaning through Biblical Texts and Contexts (Biblical Interpretation Series 185, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2020), pp. 168–191.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004439825_012
(2005) focuses on two issues: Paul’s use of Isaiah 54:1 in Galatians 4:27 and allusions to Isaiah 49 in the letter. In the former case, Wagner points out that Paul seems to show an awareness of the way in which the passage functioned within its wider setting in Isaiah. In the latter case, Wagner argues that the allusions to Isaiah 49 in the letter suggest that Paul’s views of his apostleship have been shaped by this chapter. Guy Waters
128122 C. Bruno, J. Compton and K. McFadden, Biblical Theology According to the Apostles: How the Earliest Christians Told the Story of Israel (New Studies in Biblical Theology 52, London/Downers Grove IL: Apollos/InterVarsity Press, 2020).
(2006) investigates the end of Deuteronomy in the letters of Paul. In the case of Galatians, Waters finds that Paul read Deuteronomy 27–30 as a whole, in conjunction with other texts from this book, interpreted the curse as applying to both Jews and Gentiles and may have followed the movement from “curse” to “blessing” in Deuteronomy in Galatians 3:10–14. Roy E. Ciampa
129123 J.E. Morgan-Wynne, Abraham in the New Testament (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2020), pp. 1–89.
(2007) offers a thorough discussion of Paul’s use of Deuteronomy in Galatians and Romans. In the case of Galatians, Ciampa discusses the use of Deuteronomy 13:12–16 in Galatians 1:8–9 (echo), Deuteronomy 10:17 in Galatians 2:6 (echo), Deuteronomy 27:26 in Galatians 3:10 (quotation) and Deuteronomy 21:23 in Galatians 3:13 (quotation). Ciampa concludes that it seems as if Paul regarded some texts as offering guidance for the period before Christ came, and others as offering guidance for the situation of his readers. Preston M. Sprinkle
130124 N.N. Córdova, To Live in the Spirit: Paul and the Spirit of God (Lanham MD: Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2020).
(2008) explains the interpretation of Leviticus 18:5 in Early Judaism and Paul. In the case of Galatians, Sprinkle argues that Paul objects to reading the text in the light of an “if … then” pattern, instead opting for emphasising issues such as God’s initiative. Friedrich Avemarie
131125 M.C. de Boer, “Second Isaiah and Paul’s Eschatology in the Letter to the Galatians”, in: F. Postma, K. Spronk and E. Talstra (eds.), The New
(2009) investigates the importance of lexematic association in exegesis in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in Paul’s letters. In the case of Galatians, this happens in 3:10–12. Avemarie concludes that this type of exegesis was a conscious choice and was based on the conviction that the Hebrew Scriptures formed a coherent whole. Debbie Hunn
132
(Amsterdamse Cahiers voor Exegese van de Bijbel en zijn Tradisies Supplement Series 3, Maastricht: Shaker Publishing, 2002), pp. 35–43. Things: Eschatology in Old Testament Prophecy: Festschrift for Henk Leene
(2009) examines Habakkuk in its context. Hunn contends that Paul remains within the framework of the book when applying Habakkuk 2:4 to both Jews and Gentiles in Romans 1:17 and Galatians 3:11. Wolfgang Kraus
133126 S.C. Keesmaat, “The Psalms in Romans and Galatians”, in: S. Moyise and M.J.J. Menken (eds.), The Psalms in the New Testament (The New Testament and the Scriptures of Israel, New York/London: T & T Clark Continuum, 2004), pp. 139–161.
(2009) looks at Habakkuk 2:3–4 in the Hebrew tradition and the LXX, as well as its reception in the New Testament. Kraus points out that Paul only took up the last stichos of Habakkuk 2:4 in Galatians and Romans and left out “my” to emphasise “faith”. According to Kraus, Paul did not depart from the meaning of the text but gave it a particular culmination. Hetty Lalleman
134127 J.R. Wagner, “Isaiah in Romans and Galatians”, in: S. Moyise and M.J.J. Menken (eds.), Isaiah in the New Testament (The New Testament and the Scriptures of Israel, London: T & T Clark Continuum, 2005), pp. 117–132.
(2011) discusses Paul’s self-understanding in the light of Jeremiah. In the case of Galatians, Lalleman draws attention to the similarities between 1:15–16 and Jeremiah 1, in particular the fact that the authority of the one called by God is underlined in both passages. Stephen Hultgren
135128 G. Waters, The End of Deuteronomy in the Epistles of Paul (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.221, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), pp. 79–130.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157073-5
(2011) traces the use of Habakkuk 2:4 in Early Judaism, Hebrews and in Paul. In the case of Galatians 3:11, Hultgren finds that Paul’s use of the text is in line with a tendency in Early Judaism and probably also in Early Christian circles to read it eschatological-forensically. Furthermore, Paul used it polemically in order to exclude the notion of justification by law. Eric Ottenheijm
136129 R.E. Ciampa, “Deuteronomy in Romans and Galatians”, in: M.J.J. Menken and S. Moyise (eds.), Deuteronomy in the New Testament: The New Testament and the Scriptures of Israel (Library of New Testament Studies 358, London: T & T Clark, 2007), pp. 99–117.
(2013) offers an overview of Jewish and Christian discourse on Leviticus 18:5. Ottenheijm points out that both Paul and 4 Ezra questioned whether humankind could keep the law. According to Paul, no one could keep the law, and according to 4 Ezra, only a few people were able to do so. A.B. Caneday
137130 P.M. Sprinkle, Law and Life: The Interpretation of Leviticus 18:5 in Early Judaism and in Paul (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.241, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), pp. 133–164.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151584-2
(2014) investigates Deuteronomy 21:22–23 in the contexts of the old and the new covenant. Caneday thinks that Paul’s use of the text in Galatians 3:13 should not be regarded as arbitrary. He realised that the text had typological significance. E. Ray Clendenen
138131 F. Avemarie, “Interpreting Scripture through Scripture: Exegesis Based on Lexematic Association in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Pauline Epistles”, in: F. García Martínez (ed.), Echoes from the Caves: Qumran and the New Testament (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 85, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 83–102.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004176966.i-350.23
(2014) disagrees with scholars who are of the opinion that Paul violated the meaning of Habakkuk 2:4 when he quoted it in Romans and in Galatians. Clendenen provides several reasons for interpreting the text in Habakkuk as referring to “faith” and not to faithfulness. Michael B. Shepherd
139132 D. Hunn, “Habakkuk 2.4b in Its Context: How Far Off Was Paul?”, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 34:2 (2009), pp. 219–239.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0309089209356413
(2014) brings together in one volume cases where “the text in the middle” is important. This means that “the way in which the text is cited has already been anticipated in a previous citation of the original text, thus involving at least three texts (primary, secondary, and tertiary)”.
140133 W. Kraus, “Hab 2:3–4 in the Hebrew Tradition and in the Septuagint, with Its Reception in the New Testament”, in: J. Cook (ed.), Septuagint and Reception: Essays Prepared for the Association for the Study of the Septuagint in South Africa (Vetus Testamentum Supplements 127, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 101–117.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004177253.i-414.31
In the case of Galatians, Shepherd offers an overview of how this happens in the following cases: 3:6, 8, 11, 12, 16, 19 and 4:21–5:1. Miguel Antonio Camelo V
141134 H. Lalleman, “Paul’s Self-Understanding in the Light of Jeremiah: A Case Study into the Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament”, in: J.A. Grant, A. Lo and G.J. Wenham (eds.), A God of Faithfulness: Essays in Honor of J. Gordon McConville on His 60th Birthday (Library of Hebrew
(2015) proposes a combination of a synchronic and a diachronic approach to the exegesis of Jeremiah 31:31–34 and suggests that the results imply that Galatians 4:21–31 primarily refers to a distinction between two types of believers and not between two types of covenants. According to Lutz Doering
142
pp. 96–111. Bible/Old Testament Studies 538, New York/London: T & T Clark, 2011),
(2016), Paul draws on several prophets for understanding his own position. In the case of Jeremiah, he specifically makes use of the notion of “being set apart by God” (1:15–16a) and a struggle with false prophets/apostles. Merwyn S. Johnson
143135 S. Hultgren, Habakkuk 2:4 in Early Judaism, in Hebrews, and in Paul (Cahiers de la Revue Biblique 77, Paris: J. Gabalda, 2011), pp. 63–117.
(2017) traces the use of Leviticus 18:5b in the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament. According to Johnson, Paul uses it in Galatians and Romans to argue that the law was wrongly regarded as substituting God. In a study of the reception of Leviticus 19:18 in the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint, the Book of Jubilees, the Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament, Kengo Akiyama
144136 E. Ottenheijm, “‘Which If a Man Do Them He Shall Live by Them’: Jewish and Christian Discourse on Lev 18:5”, in: B. Koet, S. Moyise and J. Verheyden (eds.), The Scriptures of Israel in Jewish and Christian Tradition: Essays in Honour of Maarten J.J. Menken (Novum Testamentum Supplements 148, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2013), pp. 303–316.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004247727_021
(2018) points out that according to Galatians 5:13–15, Paul regarded it as the key command that made it possible for believers to do what the law had been requiring from the outset. Carlos Alberto Bezerra and Rafael Omar Nachabe
145137 A.B. Caneday, “‘Anyone Hung Upon a Pole Is under God’s Curse’: Deuteronomy 21:22–23 in Old and New Covenant Contexts”, The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 18:3 (2014), pp. 121–136.
(2019) investigate the use of Habakkuk 2:4 in the New Testament. According to them, this text is best described as an example of a “pregnant statement” as its meaning was expanded in the New Testament in the light of the coming of Christ. Arturo Bravo
146138 E.R. Clendenen, “Salvation by Faith or by Faithfulness in the Book of Habakkuk?”, Bulletin for Biblical Research 24:4 (2014), pp. 505–513.
(2020) discusses Paul’s use of quotations from the prophets in Galatians 1:15–16, 3:11 and 4:27. Bravo shows that Paul used them to legitimise his apostleship and to show that salvation is a gift from God and not the result of human efforts. Etienne Jodar
147139 M.B. Shepherd, The Text in the Middle (Studies in Biblical Literature 162, New York NY/Bern/Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2014).
(2020) disagrees with scholars who believe that Paul used Leviticus 18:5 in Romans 10:5 and Galatians 3:12 in order to depict the law in a negative way. Jodar contends that one should rather interpret Leviticus 18:5 as a call upon people to practise faith. Seon Yong Kim
148140 Op. cit., p. 2.
(2020) identifies intertextual similarities between Galatians and the Book of Jeremiah. Kim argues that Paul depicts himself in this way as a rejected representative of God, just as Jeremiah does. Martinus C. de Boer
149141 M.A. Camelo V, “La Nueva Alianza en Jeremías 31,31–34: Un Texto Enlace de la Relación entre los Dos Testamentos”, Cuestiones Teológicas 42:98 (2015), pp. 439–458.
(2020) investigates Paul’s use of Psalm 142:2 LXX in 2:16 and in Romans 3:20 and concludes that he probably made use of an anthology and that he used the quotation in order to stress the seriousness of the situation in which humankind finds itself.
1.5 Other
According to Francis Watson
150142 L. Doering, “The Commissioning of Paul: Light from the Prophet Jeremiah on the Self-Understanding of the Apostle?”, in: H. Najman and K. Schmid (eds.), Jeremiah’s Scriptures: Production, Reception, Interaction, and Transformation (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 173, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2016), pp. 544–565.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004320253_044
(2001), the way in which Paul interpreted the Hebrew Scriptures in Galatians, and in particular his emphasis on the polarity between law and promise, can help one in developing a model for Scriptural unity. Ignacio Chuecas Saldías
151143 M.S. Johnson, “The Idiom of Scripture, Leviticus 18:5, and Theology: At a Time of Paradigm Shift”, Biblical Theology Bulletin 47:3 (2017), pp. 155–170.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146107917715588
(2011) discusses the dynamics between history and theology in the New Testament by looking at the way in which Paul’s life is portrayed in Acts and in Galatians, and in particular, the important role that the Hebrew Scriptures play in this process. Gert J. Steyn
152144 K. Akiyama, The Love of Neighbor in Ancient Judaism: The Reception of Leviticus 19:18 in the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint, the Book of Jubilees, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the New Testament (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 105, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2018).
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004366886
(2012) investigates quotations from the Torah overlapping between Galatians and Philo in order to determine the extent to which Philo’s quotations from the LXX may help us to identify an early text form. According to François Vouga
153145 C.A. Bezerra and R.O. Nachabe, “O Uso do Antigo Testamento no Novo Testamento: Um Estudo das Citações de Habacuque 2:4”, Revista Batista Pioneira 8:1 (2019), pp. 83–111.
(2014), the way in which the Hebrew Scriptures are interpreted in 3:6–29 is best described as a first Christian theology of the Old Testament, in particular as a response to the question how the law and the prophets should be interpreted from the event of the crucifixion of the Son of God. One of the issues to which Michael Benjamin Cover
154146 A. Bravo, “Los Profetas y San Pablo en la Carta a los Gálatas”, Cuestiones Teológicas 36:86 (2020), pp. 265–277.
(2016) draws attention in an article on Paul as a Yischmaelit, is that one finds the personification of Scripture (indicating that Scripture interprets itself) in both Pauline letters (in particular, Galatians) and midrash attributed to R. Ishmael’s school. Daniel I. Block
155147 E. Jodar, “Leviticus 18:5 and the Law’s Call to Faith: A Positive Reassessment of Paul’s View of the Law”, Themelios 45:1 (2020), pp. 43–57.
(2017) raises the question as to what Moses might have thought of Paul’s views on circumcision in Galatians. Block believes that Moses would have agreed with Paul, since circumcision had to do with internal orientation. Galatians 3:11b is one of the texts that Siegfried Kreuzer
156148 S.Y. Kim, “A Preliminary Study on the Echoes of Jeremiah in Galatians: A Brief Note on the Allusions to Jeremiah in Galatians”, 신약논단 27:3 (2020), pp. 851–876.
(2019) discusses in a study of the Greek text of Dodekapropheton as witnessed by quotations in the New Testament. According to Kreuzer, in the case of 3:11b, Paul made use or had available the so-called OG text.(See also the section on intertextuality later on in this chapter.)
2. Social-scientific/sociological approaches
This type of approach was quite popular among researchers and a broad variety of issues were investigated by scholars:
2.1 Studies focusing on methodological issues
In an investigation of Paul’s view of sin, T.L. Carter
157149 M.C. de Boer, Paul, Theologian of God’s Apocalypse: Essays on Paul and Apocalyptic (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2020). Original version: M.C. de Boer, “De Psalmen bij Paulus: LXX Psalm 142:2 in Galaten 2:16 en Romeinen 3:20”, Amsterdamse Cahiers voor Exegese van de Bijbel en zijn Tradities 25 (2010), pp. 83–94.
(2001) adapts Mary Douglas’s model (the “grid and group matrix”) in order to examine the social dynamics underlying Paul’s views of sin in 1 Corinthians, Galatians and Romans. Carter situates Galatians in the “high group/low grid quadrant” of Douglas’s matrix. This means that group identity was strong, and the symbolic system of society was rejected (sin was an external threat). In such groups, accusations of witchcraft were also common as also happens in Galatians. Ryan Heinsch
158150 F. Watson, “Gospel and Scripture: Rethinking Canonical Unity”, Tyndale Bulletin 52:2 (2001), pp. 161–182.
https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.30268
(2016) evaluates Philip Esler’s analysis of 4:21–31 in order to determine whether David Horrell’s criticism that Esler’s approach flattens conclusions is justified. Heinsch finds that this is indeed the case.
2.2 Studies focusing on ancient values and beliefs
Stephan Joubert
159151 I. Chuecas Saldías, “Interacción entre Historia y Teología en los Escritos del Nuevo Testamento: El Caso de la Biografía de Pablo”, Teología y Vida 52:3 (2011), pp. 391–406.
https://doi.org/10.4067/S0049-34492011000200004
(2001) views 2:10 from the perspective of Jewish reciprocity. By recognising the content of Paul’s gospel, the leaders of the church in Jerusalem bestowed a benefit on Paul, and accordingly, Paul was obligated to respond with a benefit from his side, namely, to assist with the problem of the poor in the congregation. Paul thus depicts himself in the letter as somebody who knows how to show his gratitude. According to John H. Elliott
160152 G.J. Steyn, “Can We Reconstruct an Early Text Form of the LXX from the Quotations of Philo of Alexandria and the New Testament? Torah Quotations Overlapping between Philo and Galatians as
(2008), Paul’s opponents accused him of bearing the evil eye – a widespread belief in the ancient world – and Paul defended himself against this accusation in Galatians. In turn, he accused them of using the evil eye in the congregations in Galatia. In the light of insights from social approaches to the New Testament, Zeba A. Crook
161
Septuaginta: Entstehung, Sprache, Geschichte: 3. Internationale Fachtagung veranstaltet von Septuaginta Deutsch (LXX.D), Wuppertal 22.–25. Juli 2010 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testaments 1.286, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012), pp. 444–464. a Test Case”, in: S. Kreuzer, M. Meiser and M. Sigismund (eds.),
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152140-9
(2008) offers a detailed explanation of the way in which the concept χάρις (normally translated as “grace”) was used in the New Testament world and argues that it should not be translated as “grace” in Galatians 2:9, 1 Corinthians 3:10 and Romans 12:3 and 15:15. In these instances, a better translation would be “benefaction” or even “favour”. According to David S. Harvey
162153 F. Vouga, “Die erste Theologie des Alten Testaments: Gal 3,6–29”, in: J.M. Robker, F. Ueberschaer and T. Wagner (eds.), Text – Textgeschichte – Textwirkung: Festschrift zum 65. Geburtstag von Siegfried Kreuzer (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 419, Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2014), pp. 413–426.
(2012), Paul aligned his own biography with the “upside-down honour” demonstrated in Christ’s death in Galatians. This code of honour was also to be enacted in the community by means of the Spirit. Mark T. Finney
163154 M.B. Cover, “Paulus als Yischmaelit? The Personification of Scripture as Interpretive Authority in Paul and the School of Rabbi Ishmael”, Journal of Biblical Literature 135:3 (2016), pp. 617–637.
https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1353.2016.3094
(2013) discusses the dynamics of honour and shame behind crucifixion in the ancient world. It was regarded as a servile supplicium (“punishment of slaves”) and from the perspective of the elite, the utter humiliation of being executed in public in the manner of a slave was revulsive. Stephen Richard Turley
164155 D.I. Block, “Hearing Galatians with Moses: An Examination of Paul as a Second and Seconding Moses”, in: D.I. Block and R. Schultz (eds.), Sepher Torath Mosheh: Studies in the Composition and Interpretation of Deuteronomy (Peabody MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2017), pp. 338–374.
(2015) investigates references to baptism and meals in Galatians and 1 Corinthians from the perspective of ritual theory. According to Turley, these rituals were primarily revelatory in that they manifested the coming of the Messianic age by means of the bodies of the believers who participated in such rituals. Simon Butticaz
165156 S. Kreuzer, “Stages of the Greek Text of Dodekapropheton Witnessed by the Quotations in the New Testament”, in: C. Dogniez and P. le Moigne (eds.), Les Douze Prophètes dans la LXX: Protocoles et procédures dans la traduction grecque: Stylistique, poétique et histoire (Vetus Testamentum Supplements 180, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2019), pp. 265–284.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004407657_018
(2016) approaches the notion of justification of faith from the perspective of ancient views on honour and shame. Paul’s views on justification opposed ancient notions on honour, both innate honour and acquired honour, since he had gained a new insight, the notion of the gift of God that was revealed to him. John W. Daniels Jr.
166157 T.L. Carter, Paul and the Power of Sin: Redefining “Beyond the Pale” (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 115, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 78–123.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511487880
(2017) discusses 2:11–14 from a sociological perspective. The way in which Paul recalled his argument with Peter amounted to “agonistic epistolary gossip” and it was meant as a challenge to his opponents in Galatia and perhaps also to the leaders in Jerusalem. From Paul’s use of the term εὐπροσωπέω (“make a good showing”) in 6:12–13, David S. Harvey
167158 R. Heinsch, “Is Sauce for the Goose, Sauce for the Gander? Evaluating Models and Methods in Galatians 4:21–31”, Canadian-American Theological Review 5:1 (2016), pp. 1–14.
(2018) deduces that there was also a concern about honour in the Galatian crisis. Accordingly, Paul tried to encourage a type of ethics specifically rejecting attempts to publicly gain honour.
2.3 Studies focusing on identity and identity formation
Philip Esler
168159 S. Joubert, “Die Leierskap van die Jerusalem-Kerk as Weldoeners tydens die Ontmoeting met Paulus: Galasiërs 2:10 en Antieke Joodse Resiprositeit”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 57:3/4 (2001), pp. 1213–1228.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v57i3/4.1885
(2000) is of the opinion that in both 1 Thessalonians and Galatians, Paul tried to develop a group identity based on the model of the family, the most prominent model of relationships in his time. Birgitte Graakjaer Hjort
169160 J.H. Elliott, “Paul, Galatians and the Evil Eye”, in: J.H. Neyrey and E.C. Stewart (eds.), The Social World of the New Testament: Insights and Models (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2008), pp. 223–234. See also earlier: J.H. Elliott, “Paul, Galatians, and the Evil Eye”, Currents in Theology and Mission 17:4 (1990), pp. 262–273, and later: J.H. Elliott, Beware the Evil Eye: The Evil Eye in the Bible and the Ancient World: Volume 3: The Bible and Related Sources (Eugene OR: Cascade, 2016), pp. 212–263.
(2002) explains the dispute reflected in Galatians by focusing on the process according to which social identity is formed by an ingroup, by comparing itself with and differentiating itself from particular outgroups, thus creating a sense of belonging. Michael W. Payne
170
perspective, see: J.H. Elliott, “Social-Scientific Criticism: Perspective, Process and Payoff: Evil Eye Accusation at Galatia as Illustration of the Method”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 67:1 (2011), pp. 1–10. For a description of the methodological approach underlying this
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v67i1.858
(2002) suggests a new missiological approach in the light of the rise in ethnic violence by focusing on the notion of identity on the basis of insights offered by Miroslav Wolf. From Galatians, Payne utilises the notions of being a new people in Christ and Paul’s focus on centred-set thinking. Magnus Zetterholm
171161 Z.A. Crook, “Grace as Benefaction in Galatians 2:9, 1 Corinthians 3:10, and Romans 12:3; 15:15”, in: D. Neufeld (ed.), The Social Sciences and Biblical Translation (Symposium Series 41, Atlanta GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008), pp. 25–38.
(2003) elucidates the separation between Judaism and Christianity at Antioch by means of a social-scientific approach. Whereas previous attempts have primarily focused on ideological differences between the groups, Zetterholm shows that there was an interplay between ideological and sociological factors. Caroline Johnson Hodge
172162 D.S. Harvey, “‘Upside-Down Honour’ and the Spirit of the Faithful Son in Galatians”, Journal of the European Pentecostal Theological Association 32:1 (2012), pp. 61–74.
https://doi.org/10.1179/jep.2012.32.1.006
(2005) approaches the way in which Paul constructed his identity as a teacher of the Gentiles from the perspective of anthropology and critical race theory. Paul described himself in terms of multiple identities but shifted among them depending on what would serve his argument best. In 2:11–14, he is thus depicted as willing to forgo some practices of the law (part of a Judean identity) in order to interact with Gentiles. Atsuhiro Asana
173163 M.T. Finney, “Servile supplicium: Shame and the Deuteronomic Curse – Crucifixion in Its Cultural Context”, Biblical Theology Bulletin 43:3 (2013), pp. 124–134.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146107913493561
Take note that Finney disagrees with Paula Fredricksen’s interpretation of the curse mentioned in Galatians 3:13: P. Fredriksen, “Judaism, the Circumcision of Gentiles, and Apocalyptic Hope: Another Look at Galatians 1 and 2”, Journal of Theological Studies 42 (1991), pp. 532–564.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/42.2.532
(2005) describes the process of community identity-construction in Galatians (in particular, by the recreation of a world view acted out in baptism with a strong egalitarian motif), by using anthropological theories and by comparing it with a minority religious group in modern Japan. Philip Francis Esler
174164 S.R. Turley, The Ritualized Revelation of the Messianic Age: Washings and Meals in Galatians and 1 Corinthians (Library of New Testament Studies 544, London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2015).
(2006) applies social theories on ethnicity, social identity and collective memory to clarify the way in which Paul used Abraham as an argument. Abraham played a central role in the ethnic identity of Judeans in the first century CE and Paul offered a counterargument, namely that the “seed” of Abraham was Christ and those who were united to him in baptism. According to Robert L. Brawley
175165 S. Butticaz, “Paul et la culture antique l’honneur: Contexte et enjeux de la justification par la foi dans la Lettre aux Galates”, Annali di Storia dell’Esegesi 33:1 (2016), pp. 107–128.
(2007), Galatians reflects a metaethical relationship with God that Paul describes as justification. Paul regards justification as the source of social identity and of a new way of behaving. He experienced this himself when his own relationship with God changed and his behaviour had to change. Bernard O. Ukwuegbu
176166 J.W. Daniels Jr., “Engendering Gossip in Galatians 2:11–14: The Social Dynamics of Honor, Shame, Performance, and Gossip”, Biblical Theology Bulletin 47:3 (2017), pp. 171–179.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146107917715589
(2008) offers an interpretation of 5:13–6:10 in terms of social identity theory: the normative prescriptions in this part of the letter formed the climax of the letter and were meant to foster group identity between Jewish and Gentile members of the congregation. Jeremy Punt published several contributions focusing on identity formation in Galatians. In the first one, Punt
177167 D.S. Harvey, “Saving Face in Galatia: εὐπροσωπέω and Concern for Honour in the Argument of Paul’s Letter”, in: J.M. Keady, T.E. Klutz and C.A. Strine (eds.), Scripture as Social Discourse: Social-Scientific Perspectives on Early Jewish and Christian Writings (T & T Clark Biblical Studies, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2018), pp. 183–196.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567676061.ch-012
(2011) draws attention to the way in which Paul uses the Abraham narrative in Genesis 16 and 21 in 4:21–5:1 for the identity formation of Jesus followers. Paul’s hermeneutics thus supports identity formation, and reciprocally, his view of believers’ identity in Christ determines his hermeneutics. In a second contribution, Punt
178168 P.F. Esler, “‘Keeping It in the Family’: Culture, Kinship and Identity in 1 Thessalonians and Galatians”, in: J.W. van Henten and A. Brenner (eds.), Families and Family Relations as Represented in Early Judaisms and Early Christianities: Texts and Fictions: Papers Read at a Noster Colloquium in Amsterdam, June 9–11, 1998 (Studies in Theology and Religion 2, Leiden: Deo, 2000), pp. 145–184. See also the critical response by Jan Willem van Henten, “The Family Is Not All That Matters: A Response to Esler”, in: J.W. van Henten and A. Brenner (eds.), Families and Family Relations as Represented in Early Judaisms and Early Christianities: Texts and Fictions: Papers Read at a Noster Colloquium in Amsterdam, June 9–11, 1998 (Studies in Theology and Religion 2, Leiden: Deo, 2000), pp. 185–191. According to Van Henten, there are at least three other models that should also
(2012) discusses Paul’s use of the Abraham narratives in Galatians and Romans from the perspective of cultural memory. By linking three elements (the contemporised past, culture and the group/community), the way in which Paul uses Scriptures to negotiate the identity of a particular group of Jesus followers is clarified. In another contribution, Punt
179
philosophers and as a unique people.be considered: Christians as a holy community, as a group of special
(2013) shows how Paul goes about creating “Others” in the letter by using the Hebrew Scriptures. Paul and his addressees are depicted as children of the promise (like Isaac). They are also linked to Sarah and distanced from Hagar. Michael Bachmann
180169 B.G. Hjort, “Identitetsdannelse i de Første Kristne Menigheder”, Religionsvidenskabeligt Tidsskrift 40:2 (2002), pp. 85–98.
https://doi.org/10.7146/rt.v0i40.2197
(2012) notes that the notion of salvation history is a controversial issue in Pauline studies. However, the most important aspects of identity are found in Pauline writings and can be shown from Galatians, in which case one can discern the following aspects: individual, social, mental and habitual aspects of identity. Susann Liubinskas
181170 M.W. Payne, “‘Identity’ and Global Ethnic Violence: A Theological-Missiological Reflection”, Mission Studies 19:2 (2002), pp. 113–135.
(2012) uses social identity theory to show that Paul depicts the Spirit in 3:19–4:7 as the most important identity marker of believers and thus, from 5:13–6:10, it is clear that life in the Spirit (according to the law of Christ) is central to Christian ethos. Galatians 5:13–6:10 should thus not be regarded as an addendum. It is central to Paul’s argument and meant to reinforce identity. Dennis C. Duling
182171 M. Zetterholm, The Formation of Christianity in Antioch: A Social Scientific Approach to the Separation between Judaism and Christianity (Routledge Early Church Monographs, London: Routledge, 2003).
(2014) uses ethnicity, marginality and structuration theories to highlight inconsistencies in Paul’s views on ethnicity (with regard to 3:28: “no longer Jew or Greek”). Duling describes Paul as culturally marginalised, someone who occasionally had to make accommodations in his attempts to unify believers – something that gave rise to unintended results. Atsuhiro Asano
183172 C.J. Hodge, “Apostle to the Gentiles: Constructions of Paul’s Identity”, Biblical Interpretation 13:3 (2005), pp. 270–288.
https://doi.org/10.1163/1568515054388146
(2014) identifies three conflicting views on the ethnic identity of the Christian community reflected in 2:1–14: Gentile believers are a secondary group, attached to the Jewish community (the view of the Jerusalem leaders), Gentile believers have to become Jewish in the full sense of the word (the view of the “false brothers”) and Gentile believers are part of a new authentic community (Paul’s view). Jacobus Kok
184173 A. Asano, Community-Identity Construction in Galatians: Exegetical, Social-Anthropological and Socio-Historical Studies (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 285, London/New York NY: T & T Clark International, 2005).
(2014) gives an overview of social identity complexity theory and applies it to Galatians. According to Kok, it seems as if Paul functioned at a high level of social identity complexity and he could thus overcome social boundaries and create higher levels of inclusiveness. Elizabeth K. Hunt
185174 P.F. Esler, “Paul’s Contestation of Israel’s (Ethnic) Memory of Abraham in Galatians 3”, Biblical Theology Bulletin 36:1 (2006), pp. 23–34.
(2018) broadens this theoretical framework of Kok by adding a socio-rhetorical approach. In this way, Hunt tries to offer more depth to the description of the conflict reflected in Galatians 2 and 3. Nina Nikki
186175 R.L. Brawley, “Identity and Metaethics: Being Justified and Ethics in Galatians”, in: R.L. Brawley (ed.), Character Ethics and the New Testament: Moral Dimensions of Scripture (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2007), pp. 107–122.
(2016) uses a social identity approach to explain why Paul is past-orientated in Galatians and Romans but future-oriented in Philippians. The reason is that he only reinterprets the Jewish historical narratives when it is demanded by the context as happens in Galatians and Romans. In Seong Wang
187176 B.O. Ukwuegbu, “Paraenesis, Identity-Defining Norms, or Both? Galatians 5:13–6:10 in the Light of Social Identity Theory”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 70:3 (2008), pp. 538–559.
(2018) uses five criteria from Gerd Theissen’s social identity theory to argue for the unity of Galatians. Kathy Ehrensperger
188177 J. Punt, “Hermeneutics in Identity Formation: Paul’s Use of Genesis in Galatians 4”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 67:1 (2011), pp. 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v67i1.846
(2019) approaches 5:12 from the perspective of identity formation, raising the question of whether differentiation necessarily implies separation. Ehrensperger interprets this verse as referring to separation and not castration. Paul wishes that the influence of his opponents would come to an end so that the identity formation of the Galatian believers can continue. Such a wish still leaves the possibility of reconciliation, implying that differentiation does not necessarily cause separation. F. Manjewa M’bwangi
189178 J. Punt, “Identity, Memory, and Scriptural Warrant: Arguing Paul’s Case”, in: C.D. Stanley (ed.), Paul and Scripture: Extending the Conversation (Early Christianity and Its Literature 9, Atlanta GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012), pp. 25–54.
(2020) uses social identity theory to show how Paul constructs a superordinate identity for his group of readers in 3:1–10, namely, a broad type of identity that includes political, religious and economic facets.(See also the section on ideology-critical approaches further on in this chapter.)
2.4 Studies highlighting the Roman Empire as context
Leonor Ossa
190179 J. Punt, “‘The Others’ in Galatians: Text and the Negotiation of Identity”, in: F. Lozada Jr. and G. Carey (eds.), Soundings in Cultural Criticism: Perspectives and Methods in Culture, Power and Identity in the New Testament (Minneapolis MI: Fortress Press, 2013), pp. 45–54.
(2004) detects a counter-programme aimed at contemporary Roman views of urbanity in Galatians. Taking the two cities in 4:21–31 as a point of departure, Ossa discusses the urban theology in the letter and concludes that the letter shows that the classical experiences of a democratic city were never really extinguished. Brigitte Kahl
191180 M. Bachmann, “Identität bei Paulus: Beobachtungen am Galaterbrief”, New Testament Studies 58:4 (2012), pp. 571–597.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688512000148
(2005) reads Galatians and Empire at the great altar of Pergamon. Kahl shows that this helps one to gain a new perspective: “The Romans knew how to integrate diversity very well, but the identity politics they were masters of was an identity politics ‘from above.’ From a Roman perspective it therefore didn’t take a revelation to see that Paul’s messianic inclusiveness and Jewish/Galatian community-in-diversity at the table of a crucified Jewish insurgent was illicit and dangerous like ancient hordes of Giants.”
192181 S. Liubinskas, “Identification by Spirit Alone: Community-Identity Construction in Galatians 3:19–4:7”, The Asbury Journal 67:1 (2012), pp. 27–55.
In another contribution, Kahl
193182 D.C. Duling, “Social-Scientific Comments on ‘Neither Judean nor Greek’ (Gal 3:28)”, in: D.L. Matson and K.C. Richardson (eds.), One in Christ Jesus: Essays on Early Christianity and “All That Jazz”, in Honor of S. Scott Bartchy (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2014), pp. 35–68.
(2010) uses the symbolic connotations of the Pergamon altar as background for understanding the context of Galatia, in particular the effect of Roman subjugation. Against this background Kahl reads Galatians as resisting the domination by the Roman Empire. Even Paul’s opposition to circumcision may be interpreted as subversive of Roman ideology.Justin K. Hardin
194183 A. Asano, “Galatians 2.1–14 as Depiction of the Church’s Early Struggle for Community-Identity Construction”, in: J.B. Tucker and C.A. Baker (eds.), T & T Clark Handbook to Social Identity in the New Testament (London: Bloomsbury, 2014), pp. 311–332.
(2008) proposes that Galatians should be interpreted against the background of the imperial cult. According to Hardin, 4:9–10 refers to the imperial cult calendar, which means that the Galatians were participating in the imperial cult at the time that Paul wrote the letter. Rebekah M. Devine
195184 J. Kok, “Social Identity Complexity Theory as Heuristic Tool in New Testament Studies”, HTS Teologiese Studies 70:1 (2014), pp. 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v70i1.2708
(2017) agrees with Hardin that 4:9–10 refers to the imperial cult calendar but is of the opinion that Paul challenged the Galatians on two fronts (and not one only as Hardin assumes). They were choosing between two kinds of “elements of the world”, namely the observance of the Jewish law and of the imperial cult calendar. Aliou Cissé Niang
196185 E.K. Hunt, “Intergroup Conflict and Social Identity in Galatians: An Exegetical Analysis”, Journal of Biblical Perspectives in Leadership 8:1 (2018), pp. 236–247.
(2012) offers an interpretation of 3:1 as it may have been heard “under watchful imperial eyes”. Niang suggests that Paul’s vivid depiction of the crucified Jesus could have awakened memories in the readers of how they were dishonoured as “Others” by the Roman Empire. Judy Diehl
197186 N. Nikki, “Contesting the Past, Competing over the Future: Why Is Paul Past-Oriented in Galatians and Romans, but Future-Oriented in Philippians?”, in: S. Byrskog, R. Hakola and J. Jokiranta (eds.), Social Memory and Social Identity in the Study of Early Judaism and Early Christianity (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus/Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 116, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), pp. 241–256.
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666593758.241
(2012) discusses some of the research highlighting anti-Roman rhetoric in the New Testament letters. One of the letters that Diehl discusses in this regard is Galatians. Jeremy Punt
198187 I.S. Wang, “The Socio-Rhetorical Reconstruction and the Unity Issue of Galatians Based Upon G. Theissen’s Church Politics”, 신약논단 25:3 (2018), pp. 831-862.
(2013) focuses on the way in which Paul uses texts from the Hebrew Scriptures, in particular from the Abraham narrative, to construct notions of Others within the context of the Roman Empire and its identity politics. In this way Paul clearly draws boundaries, thus creating insiders and outsiders. In another contribution, Punt
199188 K. Ehrensperger, “Trouble in Galatia: What Should Be Cut? (On Gal 5:12)”, in: F. Ábel (ed.), The Message of Paul the Apostle within Second Temple Judaism (Lanham MD: Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2019), pp. 179–194.
(2014) investigates the way in which Paul uses the depiction of Abraham in the Hebrew Scriptures in Galatians to negotiate identity within an imperial setting. Punt shows that Paul’s othering of people in the letter was affected by the imperial setup and the way in which the Roman Empire scripted power. Brigitte Kahl
200189 F.M. M’bwangi, “Paul and Identity Construction in Early Christianity and the Roman Empire”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 76:4 (2020), pp. 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v76i4.5652
(2014) disagrees with the common interpretation of 4:30, namely that it was meant to exclude Jewishness or to affirm issues such as racism or slavery. Instead, Kahl argues that it was aimed against the subjugation of people to the law of the conquerors (as can be seen in Roman iconography). Michael J. Thate
201190 L. Ossa, Das obere Jerusalem ist eine Freie: Demokratie und Urbanität im Galater-Brief (Europäische Hochschulschriften: Theologie 23.783, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2004).
(2014) contends that Paul did not try to subvert or mimic the Roman Empire. He rather followed a “politics of neglect”: Paul “altogether neglected to attend to empire’s ideologies, narratives of rationality, and cosmologies while busily constructing his own.”
202191 B. Kahl, “Reading Galatians and Empire at the Great Altar of Pergamon”, Union Seminary Quarterly Review 59:3/4 (2005), pp. 1–43.
Robert L. Brawley
203192 Op. cit., p. 41.
(2014) disagrees with scholars who link circumcision primarily to salvation. It should rather be linked to identity. Brawley then uses identity theory and reflections on the Roman imperial context to offer a better description of Galatian identity. James R. Harrison
204193 B. Kahl, Galatians Re-Imagined: Reading with the Eyes of the Vanquished (Paul in Critical Contexts, Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press, 2010).
(2016) draws attention to the way in which imperial peace was negotiated in Galatians, Thessalonians and Philippians. Harrison argues that Paul’s gospel inclined him to challenge the ideology of the imperial cult and to offer an alternative in which self-seeking and status became irrelevant. C. Melissa Snarr
205194 J.K. Hardin, Galatians and the Imperial Cult: A Critical Analysis of the First-Century Social Context of Paul’s Letter (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.237, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151580-4
(2017) agrees with empire-critical readings of 2:10 (such as those offered by Brigitte Kahl) and works out the contemporary implications of such insights. One should acknowledge religious differences in one’s community and try to create fellowship by remembering the poor. Christina Harker
206195 R.M. Devine, “No Gods Made with Hands: Pauline Idol Polemics”, in: D. Batovici and K. de Troyer (eds.), Authoritative Texts and Reception History: Aspects and Approaches (Biblical Interpretation Series 151, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017), pp. 52–62.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004334960_006
(2018) interprets 4:10 as referring not to the Jewish calendar (as is usually assumed) but to Roman festivals. Harker is also critical of the negative attitude in Pauline scholarship towards subordinated people and the fact that Paul’s reductionist rhetoric (often focusing on binaries) is mostly ignored. According to Harker, this even happens in empire-critical studies.(See also the section on ideology-critical approaches further on in this chapter.)
2.5 Other approaches
In an interpretation of Paul’s version of the Antioch incident in 2:11–21, Christfried Böttrich
207196 A.C. Niang, “Seeing Jesus Christ Crucified in Galatians 3:1 under Watchful Imperial Eyes”, in: A.C. Niang and C. Osiek (eds.), Text, Image, and Christians in the Graeco-Roman World: A Festschrift in Honor of David Lee Balch (Princeton Theological Monograph Series 176, Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2012), pp. 160–182.
(2002) distinguishes between relational and subject level (“Beziehungs- und Sachebebene”) and makes use of the insights offered by modern conflict theory to explain the events. Markus Cromhout
208197 J. Diehl, “Empire and Epistles: Anti-Roman Rhetoric in the New Testament Epistles”, Currents in Biblical Research 10:2 (2012), pp. 217–263.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1476993X11415346
(2009) investigates Paul’s statement in 1:13 from the perspective of cultural anthropology, in particular ethnicity theory. Cromhout concludes that Paul’s claim about his Jewishness seems to be corroborated by his other letters and it should thus not be seen as a mere rhetorical ploy. One of the examples that Soham Al-Suadi
209198 J. Punt, “The Interpretation of the New Testament as the Study of Texts and Contexts: Hermeneutics, Identities, Communities”, Acta Theologica 33:2 (2013), pp. 113–132.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2.7
(2011) picks to illustrate the benefits of ritual-theoretical exegesis is 2:11–14. Al-Suadi shows that the Antioch incident was an inner-Jewish conflict about the legitimacy of another cultural community. Paul conducts this debate by means of the terminology of the communal meal. According to Seung Moo Lee
210199 J. Punt, “Identity Claims, Texts, Rome and Galatians”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 19 (2014), pp. 81–104.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2S.5
(2012), in 3:1–14, Paul stresses the Galatians’ experiences of the Spirit and the promise of the Spirit in order to resolve the conflict in the congregations and to let them return to his gospel. Ronald Charles
211200 B. Kahl, “Hagar’s Babylonian Captivity: A Roman Re-Imagination of Galatians 4:21–31”, Interpretation 68:3 (2014), pp. 257–269.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0020964314529084
(2014) uses current diaspora studies for offering a new perspective on Paul: one cannot fully understand Paul’s theology without considering his identity as a diaspora Jew – an identity that had to be negotiated consistently. R. Mark Bell
212201 M.J. Thate, “Paul and the Anxieties of (Imperial?) Succession: Galatians and the Politics of Neglect”, in: M.J. Thate, K.J. Vanhoozer and C.R. Campbell (eds.), “In Christ” in Paul: Explorations in Paul’s Theology of Union and Participation (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.384, Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 209–252.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-153552-9
(2016) utilises insights from groupthink theory to determine if the typical symptoms of groupthink can be identified in the New Testament. One of the groups that is investigated is the Judaisers, mentioned in Galatians and Acts, in which case Bell identifies four examples of behaviour typical of groupthink. Peter-Ben Smit
213202 Op. cit., p. 237.
(2017) applies ritual failure (a sub-discipline of ritual criticism) to Galatians, Philippians and Romans. Smit shows that Paul’s views of circumcision moved through various phases: strong support, indifference, rejection and an adapted reintegration into his thinking. Smit also points out that ritual failure played an important role every time his views changed. Dexter S. Maben
214203 R.L. Brawley, “Nodes of Objective Socialization and Subjective Reflection in Identity: Galatian Identity in an Imperial Context”, in: J.B. Tucker and C.A. Stohl (eds.), T & T Clark Handbook to Social Identity in the New Testament (London: Bloomsbury, 2014), pp. 119–144.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567669865.ch-008
(2017) tries to “liberate” the Lutheran Paul through understanding the law by means of social dominance theory. Maben thus focuses on the social dimension of the law and illustrates this by means of an interpretation of 3:6–20. Seung Moon Lee
215204 J.R. Harrison, “Paul and Empire 2: Negotiating the Seduction of Imperial ‘Peace and Security’ in Galatians, Thessalonians, and Philippians”, in: A. Winn (ed.), An Introduction to Empire in the New Testament (Resources for Biblical Studies 84, Atlanta GA: SBL Press, 2016), pp. 165–184.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1ctxqqg.13
(2017) suggests that Paul mentions Abraham and the blessing of Abraham because he wishes to strengthen the identity of the recipients. Only by remaining in Christ will they be Abraham’s offspring. Simon Butticaz
216205 C.M. Snarr, “Remembering the Poor: Interfaith Collaboration, Neoliberalism, and an Anti-Imperial Gospel”, Journal of the Society of Christian Ethics 37:1 (2017), pp. 25–44.
https://doi.org/10.1353/sce.2017.0005
(2017) investigates the way in which Paul tried to manage particular ethnic parameters in Galatians and 1 Corinthians by looking at dietary issues. In the case of Galatians, Butticaz finds that Paul used a type of anthropological logic whereby the distinctive habits of both Jews and Gentiles were re-ordered by a Christological “meta-identity”. Rotimi Odudele
217206 C. Harker, The Colonizers’ Idols: Paul, Galatia, and Empire in New Testament Studies (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.460, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155904-4
(2018) approaches 3:28 from the perspective of ethnicity. The revolutionary perspective on social ethics offered by this text is then applied to contemporary Nigerian society. Seung Moo Lee
218207 C. Böttrich, “Petrus und Paulus in Antiochien (Gal 2,11–21)”, Berliner Theologische Zeitschrift 19:2 (2002), pp. 224–239.
(2020) argues that Paul encourages the Galatians in 3:14 to internalise the promises of the Spirit rather than the message proclaimed by his opponents.
3. Epistolographical approaches
Dieter Kremendahl
219208 M. Cromhout, “Paul’s ‘Former Conduct in the Judean Way of Life’ (Gal 1:13) ... Or Not?”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 65:1 (2009), pp. 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v65i1.127
(2000) believes that the best way to approach Galatians is to combine epistolographical and rhetorical approaches and to apply both approaches to the whole letter and not only to parts of it. Kremendahl points out that one can clearly discern typical letter elements in Galatians but that the adaptation of several juristic characteristics is also notable. Lauri Thurén
220209 S. Al-Suadi, Essen als Christusgläubige: Ritualtheoretische Exegese paulinischer Texte (Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 55, Tübingen: Francke, 2011).
(2000) argues for “derhetorizing” Paul. Thurén proposes that new approaches should be combined with old ones. Literary, rhetorical and epistolographical analyses of Pauline texts should thus be combined with an interest in ideological and theological issues. Rainer Dillmann
221210 S.M. Lee, “‘Experiences in Receiving the Spirit’ of the Galatian Community and the Object of ‘The Promise of the Spirit’”, 신약논단 19:4 (2012), pp. 1173–1207.
(2007) discusses the salutations in Galatians and Romans and indicates how Paul established relationships in different ways in the prescripts of the two letters. Chris Keith
222211 R. Charles, Paul and the Politics of Diaspora (Paul in Critical Contexts, Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2014).
(2008) thinks that the passages in which Paul draws attention to the fact that he has written part of a letter himself (as in 6:11) are not merely asides. They help to heighten the rhetorical force of the letter. Carl Joachim Classen
223212 R.M. Bell, “First Century Groupthink: An Exegetical Case Study”, Journal of Biblical Integration in Business 19 (2016), pp. 26–37.
(2009) is critical of the way in which New Testament scholars have used epistolography and ancient rhetoric. In the case of Galatians, epistolography did not help to explain the nature of the letter. Neither did ancient rhetoric help to clarify the structure and aim of the letter. According to Robert E. van Voorst
224213 P.-B. Smit, “In Search of Real Circumcision: Ritual Failure and Circumcision in Paul”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 40:1 (2017), pp. 73–100.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X17723488
(2010), Paul’s readers would probably not have realised that a thanksgiving was missing in Galatians, since they did not know Paul’s epistolary practice in this regard. Furthermore, Van Voorst links the omission of a thanksgiving to the exceptional content and form of 1:1–5. Jan Lambrecht
225214 D.S. Maben, “‘Why Then the Law?’ Pauline Ecclesiology and Interfaith Relations”, Bangalore Theological Forum 49:1 (2017), pp. 102–116.
(2012) agrees with Van Voorst that the readers would not have realised that a thanksgiving was absent. Lambrecht investigates the prescripts of Galatians and 2 Corinthians (also without a thanksgiving) as well, pointing out that Paul apparently felt free to adapt his style as needed. Thomas Johann Bauer
226215 S.M. Lee, “‘The Blessing of Abraham’ and Christ in Galatians 3:14a”, 신약논단 24:4 (2017), pp. 925–952.
(2011) analyses Philemon and Galatians in an attempt to answer a question originally raised by Deissmann, of whether Paul’s letters should be regarded as “epistles” or “real letters”. In the case of Galatians, Bauer finds that the letter is largely determined by the guidelines for friendship letters, although its content is different since it did not originate in Greek culture. Jeff Hubing
227216 S. Butticaz, “Paul and Ethnicity between Discourse and Social Practices”, Early Christianity 8:3 (2017), pp. 309–335, in particular p. 334.
https://doi.org/10.1628/186870317X15017545210206
(2015) disagrees with scholars who take 6:11–17 merely as the letter closing. According to Hubing, it serves as the closing of the body of the letter and also as the climax of Paul’s argument. Kyu Seop Kim
228217 R. Odudele, “Unity in Diversity for Sustainable Development in Nigeria: A Sociological Exegesis of Galatians 3:28”, Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa 20:2 (2018), pp. 148–157.
(2015) points out that scholars usually interpret Paul’s sibling language in the light of Graeco-Roman letter conventions, but that practices in Jewish letters are not considered. Kim thus investigates Jewish letters and argues that Paul’s use of sibling language shows how he redefined the family of Abraham. V.A. Kazinov
229218 S.M. Lee, “The Promise of the Spirit (Galatians 3:14) and the Internalization of the Galatian Christian Community”, 대학과 선교 43 (2020), pp. 35–61.
(2015) recommends the combination of a rhetorical approach to Galatians with other approaches, such as an epistolographical approach. Kazinov believes that such an approach can help one to identify the centre of Pauline theology. In an introduction to epistolary analysis, Jeffrey A.D. Weima
230219 D. Kremendahl, Die Botschaft der Form: Zum Verhältnis von antiker Epistolographie und Rhetorik im Galaterbrief (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus/Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 46, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000).
(2016) shows how attention to the form of the Pauline letters can enrich one’s understanding of the meaning of the letters. Joo Ki Cheol
231220 L. Thurén, Derhetorizing Paul: A Dynamic Perspective on Pauline Theology and the Law (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.124, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157373-6
(2016) highlights the following special features of the peace benediction that Paul uses in 6:16: the blessing of those who follow his example, the use of the term “the Israel of God” instead of “you” (because he wishes to refer to all believers) and the addition of the term “mercy” (because the Galatians were struggling with the false teachers propagating circumcision). Steve Reece’s
232221 R. Dillmann, “Seine Briefe sind schwer und stark (vgl. 2 Kor 10,10): Leserlenkung im Präskript des Galaterbriefs und Römerbriefs: Ein Vergleich”, in: J. Hainz (ed.), Unterwegs mit Paulus: Otto Kuss zum 100. Geburtstag (Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 2007, 2nd edition), pp. 111‑131.
(2017) investigation of Paul’s “large letters” (6:17) in the light of ancient epistolary conventions yields the following results: Paul follows a common contemporary practice and the reference to his large letters highlights the difference between his handwriting and that of his scribe.
4. Rhetorical approaches
This type of approach was quite popular among researchers and the issues were addressed from a variety of perspectives:
4.1 Studies focusing on methodological issues
Stephen A. Cooper
233222 C. Keith, “‘In My Own Hand’: Grapho-Literacy and the Apostle Paul”, Biblica 89:1 (2008), pp. 39–58.
(2000) discusses the way in which Marius Victorinus approached Galatians. He identified rhetorical figures and argumentative conventions that Paul used in Galatians, but never identified or classified the letter as a speech. Cooper thus describes Victorinus’s approach as one based on functional correspondence. Dieter Kremendahl
234223 C.J. Classen, “Kann die rhetorische Theorie helfen, das Neue Testament, vor allem die Briefe des Paulus, besser zu verstehen?”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 100:2 (2009), pp. 145–172.
https://doi.org/10.1515/ZNTW.2009.009
English
(2000) believes that the best way to approach Galatians is to combine rhetorical and epistolographical approaches and to apply both approaches to the whole letter and not only to parts of it. Kremendahl points out that one can clearly discern typical letter elements in Galatians but that the adaptation of several juristic characteristics is also notable. Lauri Thurén
235
the New Testament, and in Particular the Letters of Paul?”, in: S.E. Porter and B.R. Dyer (eds.), Paul and Ancient Rhetoric: Theory and Practice in the Hellenistic Context (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), pp. 13–40. version: C.J. Classen, “Can the Theory of Rhetoric Help Us to Understand
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139683647.003
(2000) argues for “derhetorizing” Paul. Thurén thinks that new approaches should be combined with old ones. Literary, rhetorical and epistolographical analyses of Pauline texts should be combined with an interest in ideological and theological issues. Furthermore, Thurén opts for a dynamic instead of a static view of Pauline texts, in particular, of Paul’s views of the law. In another contribution, Thurén
236224 R.E. van Voorst, “Why Is There no Thanksgiving Period in Galatians? An Assessment of an Exegetical Commonplace”, Journal of Biblical Literature 129:1 (2010), pp. 153–172.
https://doi.org/10.2307/27821010
(2001) points out that Chrysostom’s rhetorical and theological interpretation of Galatians may serve as a critical corrective to current interpretations of the letter, since he had a very good training in rhetoric. Thurén also points out that Chrysostom offered a text-based reading of the letter and determined the theology of the letter by trying to understand the devices and tactics that Paul used. Margaret M. Mitchell
237225 Jan Lambrecht, “Paul and Epistolary Thanksgiving”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 88:1 (2012), pp. 167-171.
https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.88.1.2164174
(2001) explains how one should go about using Patristic exegetes when one reads New Testament text rhetorically. Mitchell discusses John Chrysostom’s exegesis of Galatians as an example as to how this should be done. According to Mitchell, Chrysostom regarded Galatians as an aggressive and apologetic letter and such a view comes very close to Betz’s appraisal of the letter. Dieter Sänger
238226 T.J. Bauer, Paulus und die kaiserzeitliche Epistolographie: Kontextualisierung und Analyse der Briefe an Philemon und an die Galater (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.276, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151775-4
(2002) takes note of the problems caused by applying insights from ancient rhetorical handbooks to Galatians, but argues that one also cannot deny that a rhetorical approach is valuable. It is important to realise that Paul developed his argumentation in the letter on the basis of rhetorical rules that he knew. Malcolm Heath
239227 J. Hubing, Crucifixion and New Creation: The Strategic Purpose of Galatians 6.11–17 (Library of New Testament Studies 508, London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2015).
(2004) highlights the influence of contemporary rhetoric on Chrysostom’s exegesis of Galatians. Heath argues that current attempts to classify Chrysostom’s work on Galatians in term of the three classes of oratory are misguided. Furthermore, Heath illustrates the way in which Chrysostom used rhetorical concepts such as counter-position in his interpretation of the letter. Jean-Noël Aletti
240228 K.S. Kim, “Reframing Paul’s Sibling Language in Light of Jewish Epistolary Forms of Address”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 71:1 (2015), pp. 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v71i1.2860
(2004) warns against the tendency amongst some scholars to stick to descriptive rhetoric. Instead, the effect of Paul’s rhetorical choices on his theology should be noted. Furthermore, Aletti highlights three characteristics of Paul’s rhetoric: a distancing perspective, the utilisation of pisteis and topoi that could be understood from different cultures, and an inclination toward dialogue with Judaism. Mark P. Surburg
241229 V.A. Kazinov, “Риторический Анализ как Инструментарий Выявления Богословского ‘Центра’ Апостола Павла hа Примере его Письма к Галатам”, The World of Scientific Discoveries 63:3.6 (2015), pp. 2824–2839.
(2004) has offered an overview of research since Betz’s commentary on Galatians was published, pointing out that the majority of rhetorical analyses of Galatians that have been published, have not been of much benefit. Surburg believes that ancient rhetoric may still be used but in a much more modest way, as a mere window of the type of thing going on in Paul’s times. Christian Grappe
242230 J.A.D. Weima, Paul the Ancient Letter Writer: An Introduction to Epistolary Analysis (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2016).
(2009) is positive about the reintroduction of a rhetorical approach to New Testament texts by Betz. According to Grappe, this approach enables one to hear different voices in the New Testament and frees one from a fundamentalist reading. Richard N. Longenecker
243231 J.K. Cheol, “Who Are the Beneficiaries of the Peace Benediction in Galatians 6:16?”, Korean Evangelical New Testament Studies 15:4 (2016), pp. 734–759.
https://doi.org/10.24229/kents.2016.15.4.005
(2009) lauds the great contribution made by Betz in his commentary on Galatians, yet raises two points of criticism: that Betz tried to interpret the whole letter from the perspective of forensic rhetoric, and that he ignored the change in mood occurring at 4:12. Carl Joachim Classen
244232 S. Reece, Paul’s Large Letters: Paul’s Autographic Subscriptions in the Light of Ancient Epistolary Conventions (Library of New Testament Studies 561, London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2017).
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567669094
(2009) is critical of the way in which New Testament scholars have used epistolography and ancient rhetoric. In the case of Galatians, epistolography did not help to explain the nature of the letter. Neither did ancient rhetoric help to clarify the structure and aim of the letter. Classen is not against using insights from ancient (and even modern) rhetoric but argues that scholars have to weigh carefully which insights would be fruitful for a particular letter or pericope. In a discussion of Galatians as judicial rhetoric, Dragutin Matak
245233 S.A. Cooper, “Narratio and exhortatio in Galatians According to Marius Victorinus Rhetor”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft
(2012) also warns against a type of approach that is too analytical due to extensive categorisation. Furthermore, Matak warns against an approach that is preoccupied with form rather than content. V.A. Kazinov
246
91:1/2 (2000), pp. 107–135. und die Kunde der älteren Kirche
https://doi.org/10.1515/zntw.2000.91.1-2.107
(2015) recommends the combination of a rhetorical analysis of Galatians with other approaches, such as an epistolographical approach. Kazinov thinks that such an approach may help one to identify the centre of Pauline theology. According to Antonio Pitta
247234 D. Kremendahl, Die Botschaft der Form: Zum Verhältnis von antiker Epistolographie und Rhetorik im Galaterbrief (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus/Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 46, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000).
(2017), the genre of Galatians is best described as a kerygmatic letter. As such the letter exceeds the genres foreseen in ancient handbooks on rhetoric.
4.2 Studies focusing on particular rhetorical issues/approaches
James A. Kelhoffer
248235 L. Thurén, Derhetorizing Paul: A Dynamic Perspective on Pauline Theology and the Law (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.124, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157373-6
(2001) compares the ways in which Paul and Justin Martyr appeal to miracles to prove their authority. Whereas Justin Martyr normally refers to miracles to prove that the entire message of Christianity is true, Paul usually refers to them to defend his own authority. However, in 3:1–5, Paul notes that the miracles that the Galatians are experiencing at that stage are similar to what happened when he brought the gospel to them. Johan S. Vos
249236 L. Thurén, “John Chrysostom as a Rhetorical Critic: The Hermeneutics of an Early Father”, Biblical Interpretation 9:2 (2001), pp. 180–218.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156851501300139291
(2002) distinguishes between different types of rhetoric/argumentation in Paul’s letters and explains Paul’s rhetorical strategy in each instance in detail: worldly vs. spiritual rhetoric (1 Corinthians 1:10–3:4), sophistic argumentation (Romans), revelatory rhetoric (Galatians 1:1–2:11), juristic rhetoric (Galatians 3:11–12 and Romans 10:5–10), rhetoric of success (Philippians 1:12–26) and logic and rhetoric (1 Corinthians 15:12–20). According to James D. Hester
250237 M.M. Mitchell, “Reading Rhetoric with Patristic Exegetes”, in: A.Y. Collins and M.M. Mitchell (eds.), Antiquity and Humanity: Essays on Ancient Religion and Philosophy Presented to Hans Dieter Betz on His 70th Birthday (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), pp. 333–355.
(2002), Paul uses various forms typical of epideictic rhetoric in Galatians 1 and 2 in order to assert his authority, as well as the authority of the gospel. Marc Rastoin
251238 D. Sänger, “‘Vergeblich bemüht’ (Gal 4.11)? Zur paulinischen Argumentationsstrategie im Galaterbrief”, New Testament Studies 48:3 (2002), pp. 377–399.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0028688502000231
(2003) explains the way in which Paul makes use of insights from both the Jewish and Greek cultures in order to persuade the Galatians in 3:6–4:7. Rastoin discusses aspects found in this section such as diatribe, synagogal sermons, gezerah shawah and status scripti en voluntatis. Takaaki Haraguchi
252239 M. Heath, “John Chrysostom, Rhetoric and Galatians”, Biblical Interpretation 12:4 (2004), pp. 369–400.
https://doi.org/10.1163/1568515042418578
(2004) believes that Paul’s opponents based their views on the notion of blessing and curse in the Hebrew Scriptures. Paul countered their views by reversing the Old Testament rhetoric of blessing and curse, thereby creating a unique type of rhetoric based on his views of Christ. J. Paul Sampley
253240 J.-N. Aletti, “La rhétorique paulinienne: Construction et communication d’une pensée”, in: A. Dettwiler, J.-D. Kaestli and D. Marguerat (eds.), Paul, une théologie en construction (Le Monde de la Bible 51, Genève: Labor et Fides, 2004), pp. 47–66. English version: J.-N. Aletti, New Approaches for Interpreting the Letters of Saint Paul: Collected Essays: Rhetoric, Soteriology, Christology and Ecclesiology: Translated from the French by Peggy Manning Meyer (Subsidia Biblica 43, Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2012), pp. 11–35.
(2004) investigates Paul’s use of frank speech (παρρησία) against the background of conventions that were applicable in his own time as illustrated in the works of Philodemus and Plutarch. Sampley identifies several instances of frank speech in Galatians and 2 Corinthians. Christopher D. Stanley
254241 M.P. Surburg, “Ancient Rhetorical Criticism, Galatians, and Paul at Twenty-Five Years”, Concordia Journal 30:1/2 (2004), pp. 13–39.
(2004) looks at Paul’s “rhetoric of quotations”. In the case of Galatians, Stanley discusses 3:6–14 and 4:21–31 and concludes that the audience that Paul had in mind did not know the Hebrew Scriptures well. They only had a modest knowledge of these Scriptures and Paul adapted his rhetoric to their capabilities. Mika Hietanen
255242 C. Grappe, “Paul et la rhétorique: Regard sur l’histoire et les enjeux d’un débat”, Revue d’Histoire et de Philosophie Religieuses 89:4 (2009), pp. 511–530.
https://doi.org/10.3406/rhpr.2009.5844
(2005) offers a pragma-dialectical analysis of Galatians 3:1–5:12. This method was developed by Van Eemeren and Grootendorst and focuses on two aspects: a descriptive analysis (looking at technical aspects such as structures and schemes) and a normative analysis (evaluating the soundness of the reasoning). Sam Tsang
256243 R.N. Longenecker, “Hans Dieter Betz’s Galatians Commentary: A Retrospective Word of Commendation, with Some Criticisms, Thirty Years after the Commentary’s Publication”, Biblical Research 54 (2009), pp. 11–23.
(2005) discusses Paul’s slavery metaphors in Galatians in the light of insights from the New Rhetoric. Tsang divides these metaphors into three categories and explains their use by means of concepts borrowed from the New Rhetoric: apologetic usage (1:1, 10; 6:17), polemical usage (2:4; 4:30), and didactic usage (3:23–26; 4:1–10). Marc J. Debanné
257244 C.J. Classen, “Kann die rhetorische Theorie helfen, das Neue Testament, vor allem die Briefe des Paulus, besser zu verstehen?”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 100:2 (2009), pp. 145–172.
https://doi.org/10.1515/ZNTW.2009.009
English version: C.J. Classen, “Can the Theory of Rhetoric Help Us to Understand the New Testament, and in Particular the Letters of Paul?”, in: S.E. Porter and B.R. Dyer (eds.), Paul and Ancient Rhetoric: Theory and Practice in the Hellenistic Context (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), pp. 13–40.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139683647.003
(2006) focuses on Paul’s use of enthymemes in his letters. In the case of Galatians, Debanné points out that Paul relies to a great extent on enthymemic argumentation, in particular in the first four chapters. This was due to the seriousness of the situation in which he found himself. Gerhard J. Swart
258245 D. Matak, “Poslanica Galaćanima kao Sudbena Retorika”, Biblijski Pogledi 20:1/2 (2012), pp. 41–47.
(2007) illustrates the value of discourse analysis (based on syntaxis) for verifying claims about rhetorical strategies by comparing the results of a discourse analysis of Galatians with two rhetorical studies of the letter.Johan S. Vos
259246 V.A. Kazinov, “Риторический Анализ как Инструментарий Выявления Богословского ‘Центра’ Апостола Павла hа Примере его Письма к Галатам”, The World of Scientific Discoveries 63:3.6 (2015), pp. 2824–2839.
(2007) approaches Paul’s argumentation through the lens of sophistic rhetoric by reconstructing the views of a contemporary reader who did not agree with Paul’s presuppositions but knew what was accepted in rhetorical and philosophical schools as acceptable/non-acceptable ways of argumentation. According to Susannah Ticciati
260247 A. Pitta, “Retorica Epistolare della Lettera ai Galati? Bilanci e Prospettive”, Rivista Biblica 65:1/2 (2017), pp. 149–172.
(2008), it is best to understand Paul’s rhetorical strategy in Galatians as that of a “reparative reasoner”. He uses his arguments to repair/heal the suffering in the Galatian congregations. Thus, one should realise that his attempts at healing are primary, and theological issues are secondary. Sze-Kar Wan
261248 J.A. Kelhoffer, “The Apostle Paul and Justin Martyr on the Miraculous: A Comparison of Appeals to Authority”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 42:2 (2001), pp. 163–184. Updated version: J.A. Kelhoffer, Conceptions of “Gospel” and Legitimacy in Early Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.324, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 203–220.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152993-1
(2008) draws attention to the ways in which Paul uses experience as a rhetorical strategy in Galatians in order to foster group solidarity and negotiate status and power. James A. Kelhoffer
262249 J.S. Vos, Die Kunst der Argumentation bei Paulus: Studien zur antiken Rhetorik (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.149, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157227-2
Earlier versions of the contributions on Galatians: J.S. Vos, “Die Argumentation des Paulus in Galater 1,1–2,10”, in: J. Lambrecht (ed.), The Truth of the Gospel (Galatians 1:1–4:11) (Benedictina Monographic Series 12, Rome: Benedictina Publishers, 1993), pp. 11–43, J.S. Vos, “Charismatisch en Gevestigd Gezag in de Gemeente: Een Spanningsveld in de Brief van Paulus aan de Galaten”, in: J. Delobel and H.J. de Jonge (eds.), Vroegchristelijke Gemeenten tussen Ideaal en Werkelijkheid (Kampen: Kok, 2001), pp. 30–39, J.S. Vos, “Die hermeneutische Antinomie bei Paulus (Galater 3.11–12; Römer 10.5–10)”, New Testament Studies 38:2 (1992), pp. 254–270, J.S. Vos, “Paulus en de Schrift: Hermeneutiek en Retoriek in Gal 3,6–11”, in: T. Baarda, H.J. de Jonge and M.J.J. Menken (eds.), Jodendom en Vroeg Christendom: Continuïteit en Discontinuïteit (Kampen: Kok, 1991), pp. 63–79.
(2009) explains how Paul uses the notion of suffering as a defence of his apostolic authority. In the case of Galatians, Kelhoffer discusses 4:29, 5:11, 6:12 and 6:17. The point that Paul tries to get across is that his opponents avoided persecution whereas he was willing to suffer for the gospel – a state of affairs that confirm his status as an apostle. David V. Urban
263250 J.D. Hester, “Epideictic Rhetoric and Persona in Galatians 1 and 2”, in: M.D. Nanos (ed.), The Galatians Debate: Contemporary Issues in Rhetorical and Historical Interpretation (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2002), pp. 181–196. Earlier version: J.D. Hester, “Placing the Blame: The Presence of Epideictic in Galatians 1 and 2”, in: D.F. Watson (ed.), Persuasive Artistry: Studies in New Testament Rhetoric in Honor of George A. Kennedy (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplements 50, Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991), pp. 281–307.
(2010) discusses the ways in which Paul uses a rhetoric of rebuke to shape the ethos of his readers. Four instances of rebuke in the letter are investigated (1:6–7, 3:1–5, 4:8–11 and 5:2–12) by means an Aristotelian analysis and by linking them to Jeremiah. Hans Klein
264251 M. Rastoin, Tarse et Jérusalem: La double culture de l’apôtre Paul en Galates 3,6–4,7 (Analecta Biblica 152, Roma: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2003).
(2010) focuses on the ways in which Paul and John defend their roles as messengers of God (“Gottgesandten). All that they can do is to refer to themselves and their mission, but there is no absolute proof. In the case of Galatians, Paul refers to his suffering (the marks that he carries; 6:17) as evidence of his apostleship. D. Francois Tolmie
265252 T. Haraguchi, “Words of Blessing and Curse: A Rhetorical Study of Galatians”, The Asia Journal of Theology 18:1 (2004), pp. 33–50.
(2011) discusses the rhetorical function of angels in Paul’s main letters. According to Tolmie, it seems as if Paul mostly mentions angels in a context that might be typified as hyperbolic. Dieter Sänger
266253 J.P. Sampley, “Paul’s Frank Speech with the Galatians and the Corinthians”, in: J.T. Fitzgerald, D. Obbink and G. Holland (eds.), Philodemus and the New Testament World (Novum Testamentum Supplements 111, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2004), pp. 295–321.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047400240_014
(2011) identifies several literary strategies that Paul uses in his polemics in Galatians. However, although he makes use of harsh antithesis, aggressive language and polemics bordering on insults, he nevertheless ends the letter in a hopeful way, i.e., by “Amen”. According to Ian J. Elmer
267254 C.D. Stanley, Arguing with Scripture: The Rhetoric of Quotations in the Letters of Paul (New York NY/London: T & T Clark International, 2004), pp. 114–135. See also earlier: C.D. Stanley, “Biblical Quotations as Rhetorical Devices in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, in: Society of Biblical Literature: 1998 Seminar Papers: Part Two (Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers Series 37, Atlanta GA: Scholars Press, 1998), pp. 700–730.
(2013), Paul’s opponents used their own version of his conversion and his apostleship against him, and Paul responded by using the narratio of the letter as a rhetorical strategy to counter such attempts in 1:13–2:14. In an overview of the “rhetoric of difference” and the genealogy of heresy in Second Temple Judaism and Early Christianity, Robert M. Royalty Jr.
268255 M. Hietanen, Paul’s Argumentation in Galatians: A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Gal. 3.1–5.12 (Helsinki: Helsinki University Printing House, 2005). Updated version: M. Hietanen, Paul’s Argumentation in Galatians: A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Gal. 3.1–5.12 (Library of New Testament Studies 344, London: T & T Clark, 2007). See also: M. Hietanen, “The Argumentation in Galatians”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 9:2 (2007), pp. 99–120.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v28i2.52342
(2013) also discusses Paul. His views were based on an apocalyptic dualism and he created his own version of the gospel which he defended in ideological discourses of power (as happened in Galatians). Andrie B. du Toit
269256 S. Tsang, From Slaves to Sons: A New Rhetoric Analysis on Paul’s Slave Metaphors in His Letter to the Galatians (Studies in Biblical Literature 81, New York NY: Peter Lang, 2005). See also: S. Tsang, “‘Abba’ Revisited: Merging the Horizons of History and Rhetoric through the New Rhetoric Structure for Metaphors”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 9 (2007), pp. 121–141.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v28i2.52343
(2014) reads Galatians in the light of the rhetorical model of Hermogenes. From this perspective it is clear that Paul uses severe language to bring his readers to their senses. Galatians 4:12–20 then also makes sense, since it fits Hermogones’ category of “indignation”. Peter von der Osten-Sacken
270257 M.J. Debanné, Enthymemes in the Letters of Paul (Library of New Testament Studies 303, London; New York NY: T & T Clark, 2006), pp. 121–166.
(2014) discusses Paul’s use of μὴ γένοιτο (“Absolutely not!”), a rhetorical formula in Romans, and also draws attention to the way the expression is used in Galatians (similar to its use in Romans). In Galatians 2:17, Paul uses it when rejecting a wrong interpretation of the gospel by referring to the way in which a believer’s life is changed by baptism and in 3:21 when denying that promise and law should be viewed as opposing each other. Matthew E. Gordley
271258 G.J. Swart, “Reconstructing Rhetorical Strategies from the Text of Galatians: Syntax-Based Discourse as a Monitoring Device”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 9 (2007), pp. 162–173.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v28i2.52345
(2015) illuminates Paul’s argument in Galatians by looking at the Progymnasmata of Theon, in particular the νόμου εἰσφορά exercise (the introduction and refutation of a law). Paul used topoi that were common to this type of exercise. Antonio Pitta
272259 J.S. Vos, “Paul and Sophistic Rhetoric: A Perspective on His Argumentation in the Letter to the Galatians”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 9 (2007), pp. 29–52.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v28i2.52340
(2015) draws attention to mimesis in Galatians. Although it does not occur explicitly, it is found implicitly in 1:13–2:21, 3:5–6 and 4:28–31. This shows that mimesis was very important to Paul in situations where religious identity was in danger. Mihae Afrențoae
273260 S. Ticciati, “Paul as Reparative Reasoner: Group Rivalry in Galatia”, Journal of Scriptural Reasoning 7:1 (2008), (Online). Available at:
https://jsr.shanti.virginia.edu/back-issues/vol-7-no-1-january-2008-spreading-rumours-of-wisdom/paul-as-reparative-reasoner-group-rivalry-in-galatia/
(2016) discusses 6:11–18 (pride in the cross as sign of the new creation) as an example of epideictic rhetoric used by Paul to convey important educational values of the gospel to his readers. Nina E. Livesey
274261 S.-K. Wan, “Ecstasy and Exousia: Religious Experience and the Negotiations of Social Power in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, in: M.F. Foskett and O.W. Allen Jr. (eds.), Between Experience and Interpretation: Engaging the Writings of the New Testament (Nashville TN: Abingdon Press, 2008), pp. 67–81.
(2016) interprets Galatians in the light of a model developed by Cecil W. Wooten, a “rhetoric of crisis” (employed by Demosthenes and Cicero). According to Livesey, Paul used stylistic features that were typical of such a type of rhetoric in order to win the Galatians to his side. Yurii Alekseevich Kondrat’ev
275262 J.A. Kelhoffer, “Suffering as Defense of Paul’s Apostolic Authority in Galatians and 2 Corinthians 11”, Svensk Exegetisk Årsbok 74 (2009), pp. 127–143. Also available in: J.A. Kelhoffer, Conceptions of “Gospel” and Legitimacy in Early Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.324, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 187–202.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152993-1
(2016) examines the way in which Paul makes use of word play to enhance persuasion in Galatians. Kondrat’ev identifies examples of paranomasia, alliteration, assonance and hyperbaton in the letter. James R. McConnell
276263 D.V. Urban, “The Rhetoric of Rebuke and Community-Shaping in Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians: An Aristotelian Analysis, with Jeremiah as an Alternative Interpretive Rubric”, Scandinavian Evangelical E-Journal for New Testament Studies 1 (2010), pp. 28–42.
(2017) contends that Galatians 1–4 may be read as a thesis, as explained in Theon’s Progymnasmata. Accordingly, McConnell identifies the proofs that Paul used in order to argue his thesis. Mikeal C. Parsons and Michael Wade Martin
277264 H. Klein, “Die Selbstverteidigung des Gottgesandten bei Paulus und Johannes”, Sacra Scripta: Journal of the Centre for Biblical Studies 8:2 (2010), pp. 175–184.
(2018) investigate the influence of the Progymnasmata on the New Testament writings, in particular on their form and style. This is illustrated by examples, also from Galatians. Group Loire
278265 D.F. Tolmie, “Angels as Arguments? The Rhetorical Function of References to Angels in the Main Letters of Paul”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 67:1 (2011), pp. 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v67i1.825
(2019) – a group of semioticians from Tours – identifies the threefold rhetorical challenge that Paul had to face (logos, pathos and ethos) and explains how Paul’s “I” encounters the “you” in Galatians in order to build a common “we”. Martin Meiser
279266 D. Sänger, “Literarische Strategien der Polemik im Galaterbrief”, in: O. Wischmeyer and L. Scornaienchi (eds.), Polemik in der frühchristlichen Literatur: Texte und Kontexte (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 170, Berlin/New York NY: De Gruyter, 2011), pp. 155–181.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110223545.2.155
(2020) compares the way in which Paul represents himself in Galatians with insights from ancient rhetorical handbooks and speeches delivered by Cicero. Meiser points out that Paul’s self-representation in the letter would probably not have been experienced by his readers as something unusual. Furthermore, in terms of rhetorical practice in Paul’s time, it was not regarded as inappropriate to utilise negative effects, as long as they served the purpose of the argument.
4.3 Studies discussing the whole letter
Dale L. Sullivan
and
Christian Anible
280267 I.J. Elmer, “Setting the Record Straight at Galatia: Paul’s narratio (Gal 1:13–2:14) as Response to the Galatian Conflict”, in: W. Mayer and B. Neil (eds.), Religious Conflict from Early Christianity to the Rise of Islam (Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 121, Berlin: De Gruyter, 2013), pp. 21–38.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110291940.21
(2000) point out that modern rhetoric assumes that epideictic rhetoric helps to create and sustain values. Accordingly, they investigate five aspects of the rhetoric of Galatians, showing how Paul uses the letter to establish authority, create a sense of communion and cultivate virtue. According to Michael R. Cosby
281268 R.M. Royalty Jr., The Origin of Heresy: A History of Discourse in Second Temple Judaism and Early Christianity (Routledge Studies in Religion 18, London/New York NY: Routledge, 2013), pp. 64–88.
(2002), the type of rhetoric that Paul uses in Galatians should be described as “red-hot rhetoric”. It is neither a logical elucidation of salvation by faith nor a speech written according to the guideline of ancient rhetoric, but rather a condemnation of Paul’s opponents and a stern warning to the Galatians. D. Francois Tolmie
282269 A.B. du Toit, “Galatians and the περὶ ἰδεῶν λόγου of Hermogenes: A Rhetoric of Severity in Galatians 5–6”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 70:1 (2014), pp. 1–10,
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v70i1.2739
, and “Galatians and the περὶ ἰδεῶν λόγου of Hermogenes: A Rhetoric of Severity in Galatians 5–6”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 70:1 (2014), pp. 1–5,
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v70i1.2738
(2005) offers a text-centred rhetorical analysis of the letter. The content of the letter is divided into 18 rhetorical phases (grouped together in six rhetorical objectives) with Paul’s rhetorical strategy explained in each phase from the text itself. In a rhetorical analysis of Galatians, Ivica Čatić and Marko Rajić
283270 P. von der Osten-Sacken, Der Gott der Hoffnung: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Theologie des Paulus (Studien zu Kirche und Israel: Neue Folge 3, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2014), pp. 217–245.
(2017, 2018) do not try to fit the letter into a specific system from ancient rhetorical handbooks. Instead, they concentrate on the rhetorical genre dominating in a particular section in the letter. Accordingly, they distinguish between three sections in the letter: a narrative section (1:1–2:14), a demonstrative section (2:15–4:31) and a parenetic section (5:1–6:20). James W. Thompson
284271 M.E. Gordley, “Galatians and the Progymnasmata on Refuting a Law: A Neglected Aspect of Pauline Rhetoric”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 5:1 (2015), pp. 21–39.
https://doi.org/10.2307/jstudpaullett.5.1.0021
(2020) discusses theology and rhetoric in the Pauline letters. In the case of Galatians, Thompson largely follows Betz’s outline and remarks that the way in which Paul arranged his argument might have been similar to the guidelines found in ancient rhetoric but that it would only have made sense to believers, since Paul bases his argument on revelation.
4.4 Studies focusing on specific pericopes/verses
L. Ann Jervis
285272 A. Pitta, “I Gradi della Mimesi nella Lettera ai Galati”, Liber Annuus 65 (2015), pp. 249–257.
https://doi.org/10.1484/J.LA.4.000113
(2000) explains Paul’s rhetoric in 3:19–25 in terms of an argument based on God’s faithfulness. God placed functional and temporal limits on the law, according to his redemptive plan. Jerome Murphy-O’Connor
286273 M. Afrențoae, “The Pride in the Cross Signaling the New Creation”, Romanian Journal of Artistic Creativity 4:3 (2016), pp. 32–42.
(2000) explains Paul’s rhetorical aim with 2:2 as deceiving his opponents and making them feel complacent, thus heightening the impact of the next verse where he announces that Titus was not compelled to be circumcised. Roh-Sik Park
287274 N.E. Livesey, Galatians and the Rhetoric of Crisis: Demosthenes – Cicero – Paul (Salem OR: Polebridge, 2016).
(2003) disagrees with scholars who regard 4:12–20 as erratic. Park is of the view that Paul refers to his sufferings in a forceful manner in this pericope in order to bring the Galatians back to the truth. L. Michael White
288275 Ю.А. Kондратьев, “Риторический Прием Языковой Игры в Послании к Галатам Святого Апостола Павла”, Филологические Науки: Вопросы Теории и Практики 4:58 (2016), pp. 107–109.
(2003) discusses the same pericope, but from a different perspective. White believes that Betz is correct in identifying the friendship topos in this passage but is wrong in regarding it as a mere emotional outburst. It rather contains one of Paul’s principal charges: that the Galatians did not adhere to the values of friendship. Jean-Noël Aletti
289276 J.R. McConnell, “Galatians as Thesis”, Review & Expositor 114:2 (2017), pp. 226–238.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0034637317702357
(2005) regards 1:11–2:21 as a unified argument: 1:11–12 is the propositio, 2:14b–21 is a brief speech bringing the argument to a climax, and 2:16 reformulates Paul’s gospel while also serving as the thesis of the next two chapters. Juan Luis Caballero
290277 M.C. Parsons and M.W. Martin, Ancient Rhetoric and the New Testament: The Influence of Elementary Greek Composition (Waco TX: Baylor University Press, 2018).
(2004) uses rhetorical analysis to clarify Paul’s argument in Galatians 3: a Christological thesis forms the centre of the argument and is backed up by Scripture and Paul’s authority (based on revelation). Susanne Schewe
291278 Groupe Loire, “Du je au nous: Identité de Paul, identité du chrétien”, Sémiotique et Bible 176 (2019), pp. 38–60.
(2005) applies a text-pragmatical approach to Galatians 5:13–6:10. By means of a close reading of the text, Schewe attempts to show that this section of the letter is an integral part of Paul’s argument and even forms the climax of his argument. D. Francois Tolmie
292279 M. Meiser, “Die Selbstpräsentation des Paulus im Galaterbrief im Vergleich mit antiker rhetorischer und epistolographischer Praxis”, Sacra Scripta 18:1 (2020), pp. 7–35.
(2005) offers a text-centred rhetorical analysis of 1:1–10 in order to illustrate how such an approach differs from other rhetorical approaches to the letter. Hung-Sik Choi
293280 D.L. Sullivan and C. Anible, “The Epideictic Dimension of Galatians as Formative Rhetoric: The Inscription of Early Christian Community”, Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric 18:2 (2000), pp. 117–145.
https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2000.18.2.117
(2008) contends that 5:2–12 is the climax of the letter, summarising all the previous parts of the letter and previewing what follows, and that it should thus be taken as the hermeneutical key to the letter. Debbie Hunn
294281 M.R. Cosby, “Galatians: Red-Hot Rhetoric”, in: A. Eriksson, T.H. Olbricht and W. Übelacker (eds.), Rhetorical Argumentation in Biblical Texts: Essays from the Lund 2000 Conference (Emory Studies in Early Christianity 8, Harrisburg PA: Trinity, 2002), pp. 296–309.
(2010) notes that scholars understand Paul’s rhetorical strategy in 1:13–2:21 in different ways: defence of his apostleship, denial of accusations and depiction of himself as a paradigm. Hunn is of the opinion that Paul distinguishes between two options in 1:10 – pleasing people or pleasing God – and that he defends his gospel by referring to his experience at the Damascus event and what motivated him in life. According to Eric Stewart
295282 D.F. Tolmie, Persuading the Galatians: A Text-Centred Rhetorical Analysis of a Pauline Letter (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.190, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157055-1
(2011), Paul’s argument about the change in Peter’s behaviour is best understood in terms of the rhetorical and social conventions associated with the encomium. Paul explains the change in his own behaviour as something positive whereas the change in Peter’s behaviour is depicted in negative terms. In a rhetorical analysis of 1:13–2:21,
Bartolomeo Puca
296283 I. Čatić and M. Rajić, “Retoričko-Kritička Analiza Poslanice Galaćanima (I)”, Diacovensia 25:4 (2017), pp. 567–583,
https://doi.org/10.31823/d.25.4.4
and I. Čatić and M. Rajić, “Retoričko-Kritička Analiza Poslanice Galaćanima (II)”, Diacovensia 26:1 (2018), pp. 55–80.
https://doi.org/10.31823/d.26.1.3
(2011) draws attention to Paul’s paradoxical self-praise in 1:13–2:21: Paul shifts the attention from his own personal experience to God, thereby emphasising the divine origin of his gospel and offering an example of faithfulness to it. Ian J. Elmer
297284 J.W. Thompson, Apostle of Persuasion: Theology and Rhetoric in the Pauline Letters (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2020), pp. 169–184.
(2013) argues that Paul’s opponents used their own version of Paul’s conversion and his apostleship against him and that he utilised 1:13–2:14 as narratio to counter such attempts. That Paul refers to his and the Galatians’ calling as both happening through grace (1:6, 1:15) is taken by Orrey McFarland
298285 L.A. Jervis, “Galatians 3:19–25 as an Argument for God’s Faithfulness: Reading Paul’s Rhetoric in Light of His Strategy”, Word & World 20:3 (2000), pp. 281–298.
(2013) as an indication that Paul rhetorically and theologically identifies with them so that their stories are intertwined. Accordingly, Paul’s autobiographical testimony in Chapters 1 and 2 cannot be separated from Chapters 3 to 6. Dieter Mitternacht
299286 J. Murphy-O’Connor, “To Run in Vain (Gal 2:2)”, Revue Biblique 107:3 (2000), pp. 383–389.
(2013) explains Paul’s rhetorical skill as seen in the opening of the letter (identified as 1:1–10), in particular, in the way in which this serves to help set the stage for the important request in 4:12, with 1:13–4:11 showing the plausibility of the request and 4:13–6:10 highlighting the benefits or harm to follow if the request was honoured or ignored. Marc Rastoin
300287 R.-S. Park, “The Rhetorical Nature of Gal. 4:12–20”, 신약논단 10:1 (2003), pp. 117–137.
(2014) highlights Paul’s masterly rhetorical skills in 4:1–7. By alluding to freedom, he touches on an issue that was of utmost importance both in the Hellenistic culture and in the Jewish faith. Nils Neumann
301288 L.M. White, “Rhetoric and Reality in Galatians: Framing the Social Demands of Friendship”, in: J.T. Fitzgerald, T. Olbricht and L.M. White (eds.), Early Christianity and Classical Culture: Comparative Studies in Honor of Abraham J. Malherbe (Novum Testamentum Supplements
(2015) interprets Paul’s statement in 3:1 that Christ was publicly exhibited before the eyes of his readers in the light of a similar practice mentioned widely in ancient rhetorical handbooks. According to Neumann, Paul refers to his earlier narration of the Damascus event to the readers through which they could participate in his visionary experience. Michael M. Ramos
302
110, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2003), pp. 307–349.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047402190_018
(2016) uses social-rhetorical criticism to explain why Paul quoted Deuteronomy 27:26 to explain justification by faith in Christ.David A. deSilva
303289 J.-N. Aletti, “Galates 1–2: Quelle fonction et quelle démonstration?”, Biblica 86:3 (2005), pp. 305–323. English version: J.-N. Aletti, New Approaches for Interpreting the Letters of Saint Paul: Collected Essays: Rhetoric, Soteriology, Christology and Ecclesiology: Translated from the French by Peggy Manning Meyer (Subsidia Biblica 43, Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2012), pp. 215–236.
(2016) explains Paul’s rhetorical strategy in 5:1–12 by identifying three typical forms of appeal found in most oratory – logos, pathos and ethos – in the pericope. In 5:1–6, Paul primarily uses logos (supported by ethos and pathos) and in 5:7–12 he primarily uses ethos (supported by pathos). Based on a rhetorical and narrative analysis of 2:11–14, Alfredo Delgado Gómez
304290 J.L. Caballero, “La Promesa a Abrahán según Ga 3,1–29”, Scripta Theologica 36:1 (2004), pp. 259–272.
(2016) proposes that the open ending of Paul’s version of the Antioch incident was a deliberate strategy on his part to create expectation in his audience.
5. Narrative approaches
Edward Adams
305291 S. Schewe, Die Galater zurückgewinnen: Paulinische Strategien in Galater 5 und 6 (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testament 208, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005).
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666530722
(2000) analyses four facets of point of view in 1:13–2:14 (time, space, psychology and ideology) and shows how they serve Paul’s rhetorical goal of establishing a self-defence against his opponents. In 2002, Bruce W. Longenecker
306292 D.F. Tolmie, “The Rhetorical Analysis of Galatians: Is There Another Way?”, in: P. Chatelion Counet and U. Berges (eds.), One Text, Thousand Methods: Studies in Memory of Sjef van Tilborg (Biblical Interpretation Series 71, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2005), pp. 275–289.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047415428_017
See also: D.F. Tolmie, Persuading the Galatians: A Text-Centred Rhetorical Analysis of a Pauline Letter (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.190, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), pp. 31–44.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157055-1
published a volume in which the strengths and weaknesses of a narrative approach to Paul were assessed. Five “stories” in Galatians and Romans were investigated: God and creation (Edward Adams; response by R. Barry Matlock), the story of Israel (Bruce W. Longenecker; response by Morna D. Hooker), the story of Jesus (Douglas A. Campbell; response by Graham N. Stanton), Paul’s story (John M.G. Barclay; response by David G. Horrell) and the story of predecessors and inheritors (Andrew T. Lincoln; response by I. Howard Marshall). The volume was concluded by reflections by James D.G. Dunn and Francis Watson. Timothy Wiarda
307293 H.-S. Choi, “The Rhetorical Function of Galatians 5:2–6”, Torch Trinity Journal 11:1 (2008), pp. 104–116.
(2004) focuses on plot and character in 1:13–2:21. According to Wiarda, such an analysis does not only confirm the traditional interpretation of the narrative (that Paul uses it to establish his credentials) but also shows that it has a definitive paradigmatic goal. In an analysis of narrativity and intertextuality in 4:21–5:1, Alain Gignac
308294 D. Hunn, “Pleasing God or Pleasing People? Defending the Gospel in Galatians 1–2”, Biblica 91:1 (2010), pp. 24–49.
(2005) discusses issues such as characterisation and elliptic narration. Gignac shows that the important question was not who was a descendant of Abraham but in which logic the believer was situated, that of a servant or that of Isaac. In another contribution, Gignac
309295 E. Stewart, “I’m Okay, You’re Not Okay: Constancy of Character and Paul’s Understanding of Change in His Own and Peter’s Behaviour”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 67:3 (2011), pp. 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v67i3.1002
(2006) offers a narratological analysis of 1:13–2:21, arguing that the narrator tries to persuade the Galatians to be faithful to their own narrative and thus creates a narrative intertwining their story and his. According to Joel Willitts
310296 B. Puca, Una Periautologia Paradossale: Analisi Retorico-Letteraria di Gal 1,13–2,21 (Tesi Gregoriana: Serie Teologia 186, Roma: Pontificio Università Gregoriana, 2011).
(2016), a narratological reading of 2:11–14 shows “Paul as a Rabbi of Messianic Judaism instructing Jewish believers in Jesus how to live out their trust in Yeshua as Torah observant Jews”.
311297 I.J. Elmer, “Setting the Record Straight at Galatia: Paul’s narratio (Gal 1:13–2:14) as Response to the Galatian Conflict”, in: W. Mayer and B. Neil (eds.), Religious Conflict from Early Christianity to the Rise of Islam (Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 121, Berlin: De Gruyter, 2013), pp. 21–38.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110291940.21
One of the passages that Greger Andersson
312298 O. McFarland, “‘The One Who Calls in Grace’: Paul’s Rhetorical and Theological Identification with the Galatians”, Horizons in Biblical Theology 35:2 (2013), pp. 151–165.
https://doi.org/10.1163/18712207-12341258
(2019) discusses in a study of “narrating selves” in the Bible is 1:11–2:14. Andersson is of the opinion that it is used in this passage by Paul both to defend his authority and to offer himself as a role model. Christoph Heilig
313299 D. Mitternacht, “‘Forceful and Demanding’: On Paul as a Letter Writer”, Theology & Life 36 (2013), pp. 127–142.
(2020) utilises narrative theory and text linguistics to develop a new narratological approach for analysing narrative structures of various kinds in Paul’s letters. The method that Heilig proposes addresses shortcomings in the approaches of Hays and Wright.
6. Semiotic approaches
Jean Berchmans Paluku Mukwemulere contributed two semiotic studies on Galatians. In the first one, Mukwemulere
314300 M. Rastoin, “Framing Freedom: Galatians 4:1–7 and Pauline Rhetoric”, Revue Biblique 121:2 (2014), pp. 252–266.
(2014) offers a semiotic analysis of the promise and the law in the letter (in particular, their discursive setting and figurative aspects) and argues that in the case of the promise, there is a tension between beginning and fulfilment and that the law is characterised by a logic of repetition. In the second one, Mukwemulere
315301 N. Neumann, “‘Jesus Christus vor Augen zeichnen’ (Gal 3,1): Die rhetorische Strategie des Paulus in Galatien”, in: C. Breytenbach (ed.), Paul’s Graeco-Roman Context (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 277, Leuven/Paris/Bristol CT: Peeters, 2015), pp. 443‑455.
(2014) discusses the theological implications of the first contribution for the anthropology, Christology and ecclesiology of the letter. In particular, the anthropology of the letter is linked to the dynamic articulation of promise, law and childhood of God, with Christ’s death on the cross depicted as bringing about the necessary transformation and establishing a dynamic of spiritual childhood moving beyond the logic of the law and blood relationships. Brigitte Kahl
316302 M.M. Ramos, “Deuteronomy 27:26: ‘The Curse of the Law’: Shall the People of God Be Identified by Law or by Christ?”, De La Salle Lipa Journal of Multidisciplinary Research 3:1 (2016), pp. 1–13.
(2017) offers an interactive reading of The Galatian Suicide and Galatians 3:1, focusing in particular on the binary semiotics between the two. Kahl finds that “Paul’s verbal icon of Christ Crucified (Gal 3:1) emerges as the transbinary messianic reimagination of The Galatian Suicide: a life practice outside as much as inside the ‘iron cage’ of its binaries, yet never reconcilable with them.”
317303 D.A. deSilva, “Appeals to logos, pathos, and ethos in Galatians 5:1–12: An Investigation of Paul’s inventio”, in: S.E. Porter and B.R. Dyer (eds.), Paul and Ancient Rhetoric: Theory and Practice in Hellenistic Context (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), pp. 245–264.
https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139683647.014
Group Loire
318304 A. Delgado Gómez, “El Final Abierto del Incidente de Antioquía según Pablo en Gal 2,11–14”, Salmanticensis 63:1 (2016), pp. 93–109.
(2019) – a group of semioticians from Tours – identifies the threefold rhetorical challenge that Paul had to face (logos, pathos and ethos) and explains how Paul’s “I” encounters the “you” in Galatians in order to build a common “we”.
7. Studies focusing on intertextuality
In an intertextual study of Ezra 4–5 and Galatians 1–2, Mark McEntire
319305 E. Adams, “Ideology and Point of View in Galatians 1–2: A Critical Linguistic Analysis”, in: S.E. Porter (ed.), Diglossia and Other Topics in New Testament Linguistics (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 193, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), pp. 205–254.
(2000) highlights the parallels between the two writings, pointing out that Paul and the author of Ezra share the conviction that God’s deeds are part of an ongoing narrative, with both writings becoming part of this narrative. Douglas C. Mohrmann
320306 B.W. Longenecker (ed.), Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2002). See also Richard Hays’s response: “Is Paul’s Gospel Narratable?”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 27:2 (2004), pp. 217–239.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0402700205
(2009) discusses the intertextual semantics of Leviticus 18:5 in Galatians and Romans. Mohrmann offers an overview of Jewish interpretations of the text before showing that Paul uses it in different ways in Galatians and Romans. In Galatians, it occurs in a context where he distinguishes between two options and, in Romans, it occurs in a context where he discusses a seeming failure of God’s word in history. Diego Pérez-Gondar
321307 T. Wiarda, “Plot and Character in Galatians 1–2”, Tyndale Bulletin 55:2 (2004), pp. 231–252.
https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.29175
(2020) points out the dependencies between different versions of Psalm 87:5 and then explains the influence this text had on Galatians 4:26 and 4 Ezra 10:7–10 and how it was modified in each instance.(See also the section “Paul’s use of the Hebrew Scriptures” at the beginning of this chapter.)
8. Recipient-orientated approaches
Dieter Mitternacht published two studies from this perspective. In the first one, Mitternacht
322308 A. Gignac, “Lorsque Paul ‘raconte’ Abraham, Agar et l’autre femme: Narrativité et intertextualité en Ga 4,21–5,1”, in: C. Focant and A. Wénin (eds.), Analyse narrative et Bible: Deuxième Colloque International du RRENAB, Louvain-la-Neuve, Avril 2004 (Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses/Bibliotheca 191, Leuven: Peeters, 2005), pp. 463–480.
(2002) follows a recipient-oriented approach, showing that the Galatian believers decided to be circumcised not so much for theological reasons, but rather because they wished to avoid persecution. In the second one, Mitternacht
323309 A. Gignac, “Une approche narratologique de Galates: État de la question et hypothèse générale de travail”, Science et Esprit 58:1 (2006), pp. 5–22.
(2007) demonstrates how one can read Galatians in an aural setting, by focusing on questions such as what the first readers would have remembered after having listened to the letter and the structural elements in the letter that would have aided its reception. Martin Ebner
324310 J. Willitts, “Paul the Rabbi of Messianic Judaism: Reading the Antioch Incident within Judaism as an Irreducibility Story”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 6:2 (2016), pp. 225–247.
(2006) describes a possible scenario as to how a congregation in Galatia might have reacted after Paul’s letter had been read to them. Bernhard Oestreich
325311 Op. cit., p. 246.
(2012) illustrates the use of performance criticism for interpreting the Pauline letters – an approach taking seriously the fact that the letters were read aloud to the recipients in his congregations – by discussing examples from several Pauline letters. In the case of Galatians, one of the issues that receives attention, is the strategies that Paul uses to win back the Galatians.
9. Psychological approaches
Dieter Mitternacht
326312 G. Andersson, “Narrating Selves and the Literary in the Bible”, Partial Answers: Journal of Literature and the History of Ideas 17:1 (2019), pp. 87–105.
https://doi.org/10.1353/pan.2019.0005
(2004) offers a social-psychological perspective on Galatians. Mitternacht uses insights regarding “causal schemata” (based on the research of H.H. Kelley) to highlight cognitive incongruences in the argument of Galatians, as well as the religion-psychological role theory of Hjalmar Sundén to explain Paul’s bewilderment that the Galatians have not yet mythologically experienced the crucified Christ. James A. Kelhoffer
327313 C. Heilig, Paulus als Erzähler? Eine narratologische Perspektive auf die Paulusbriefe (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 237, Berlin/Boston MA: De Gruyter, 2020).
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110670691
(2007) responds critically to the remarks of William V. Harris
328314 J.B.P. Mukwemulere, “Figures de la promesse et de la loi dans l’Épître de Paul aux Galates: (1) Approche sémiotique”, Sémiotique et Bible 155 (2014), pp. 43–55.
about management of anger in the Pauline letters. Amongst others, Kelhoffer refers to 5:20. Furthermore, Kelhoffer argues that the anger that Paul expressed toward Peter in Antioch was not consistent with Paul’s own expectations of others, but that he probably would have regarded his anger as justified. Derek Edwin Noel King
329315 J.B.P. Mukwemulere, “Figures de la promesse et de la loi dans l’Épître de Paul aux Galates: (2) Quelques propositions théologiques”, Sémiotique et Bible 156 (2014), pp. 5–27.
(2012) analyses Paul’s letters by means of personality typing techniques. In the case of the undisputed Pauline letters, Kings finds that Paul may be classified as an ESTJ (Dominant Thinking, Auxiliary Sensing, Tertiary Intuitive and Inferior Feeling). Linda Joelsson
330316 B. Kahl, “The Galatian Suicide and the Transbinary Semiotics of Christ Crucified (Galatians 3:1): Exercises in Visual Exegesis and Critical Reimagination”, in: V.K. Robbins, W.S. Melion and R.R. Jeal (eds.), The Art of Visual Exegesis: Rhetoric, Texts, Images (Emory Studies in Early Christianity 19, Atlanta GA: SBL Press, 2017), pp. 195–240.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1pk86wt.11
(2016) discusses the different attitudes towards and coping with death in Paul’s undisputed letters. In the case of Galatians, the focus falls on persecution and death, both symbolically and literally. Furthermore, Christ’s shameful death is of central importance; to be loyal to him and be co-crucified with him was thus risky.
10. Ideology-critical approaches
Under this heading a wide variety of approaches are discussed. In several instances, an approach followed by a particular scholar falls in more than one category. In such cases, it has been placed in the category where it seems to fit best.
10.1 Liberational readings
Charles T. Davis III
331317 Op. cit., p. 201.
(2002) points out that early believers created a new identity narrative based on the meta-narrative of the Jewish faith. This process was inspired by the Spirit and Paul thus urged believers to remain faithful to the power of the Spirit, but unfortunately, he also made use of toxic texts such as 4:21–31 to dismiss his Jewish opponents – a form of behaviour that should not be followed in our times. According to Brigitte Kahl
332318 Groupe Loire, “Du je au nous: Identité de Paul, identité du chrétien”, Sémiotique et Bible 176 (2019), pp. 38–60.
(2004), Paul’s aim in 4:21–5:1 is not to drive out people that are socially weak: “‘Drive out the slave’ means the whole hierarchical division of humanity into superior and inferior, excluded and included, which shapes the present world”.
333319 M. McEntire, “Letters in Stories and Stories in Letters: An Intertextual Exploration of Ezra 4–5 and Galatians”, Perspectives in Religious Studies 27:3 (2000), pp. 249–261. Denise Kimber Buell and Caroline Johnson Hodge
334320 D.C. Mohrmann, “Of ‘Doing’ and ‘Living’: The Intertextual Semantics of Leviticus 18:5 in Galatians and Romans”, in: B.J. Oropeza, C.K. Robertson and D.C. Mohrmann (eds.), Jesus and Paul: Global Perspectives in Honor of James D.G. Dunn for His 70th Birthday (Library of New Testament Studies 414, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2009), pp. 151–172.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567660831.ch-013
(2004) challenge interpretations of Pauline literature (amongst others of 3:28) that are based on the notion of ethnicity as a “given”. Instead, they propose a dynamic approach that is based on the insight that notions of ethnicity and race are constructed socially. Accordingly, they illustrate how Paul can be interpreted in an imaginative way so that differences between people are neither removed nor ranked hierarchically. Jeremy Punt
335321 D. Pérez-Gondar, “The New Jerusalem as a Mother: Intertextuality among Ps 87,5, Gal 4,26, and 4 Ezra 10,7–10”, Biblica 101:4 (2020), pp. 543–561.
https://doi.org/10.2143/BIB.101.4.3289119
(2006) situates Paul’s exegetical practice in 4:21–5:1 in terms of exegetical practices in the first century CE. By rereading the events in Scripture, Paul brings about a cultural revision. Furthermore, Punt points out that this pericope reveals Paul’s ambivalent position regarding issues of gender and power. The relationship between 3:28 and the household codes in Colossians (with the Acta Isodori functioning as a background) is the subject of a study by Marianne Bjelland Kartzow
336322 D. Mitternacht, “Foolish Galatians? – A Recipient-Oriented Assessment of Paul’s Letter”, in: M.D. Nanos (ed.), The Galatians Debate: Contemporary Issues in Rhetorical and Historical Interpretation (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2002), pp. 408–433.
(2010) in which the value of an intersectional approach (i.e., a focus on how categories of oppression overlap, thus modifying and reinforcing each other) is demonstrated. From this study, it is clear that identities in antiquity and Christianity were so complex that scholars who study them cannot focus on one pair of relationships only (e.g., male/female). Instead, they need to consider the intersection of various aspects such as ethnicity, class, gender and age. In another study, Kartzow
337323 D. Mitternacht, “A Structure of Persuasion in Galatians: Epistolary and Rhetorical Appeal in an Aural Setting”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 9 (2007), pp. 53–98.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v28i2.52341
(2017) uses the same approach to highlight three important insights: an intersectional approach opens up spaces for readers experiencing discrimination, 4:21–31 is not gender inclusive as Hagar is marginalised, and the reference to Hagar draws attention to the claim in 3:28, encouraging discussions about ambiguous memories about marginalised women. Raquel Echevarría
338324 M. Ebner, “Nachdem die Worte des Briefes verklungen waren ... Ein narrativer Versuch zur Erstrezeption des Galaterbriefes”, in: G. Hotze and E. Spiegel (eds.), Verantwortete Exegese: Hermeneutische Zugänge – Exegetische Studien – Systematische Reflexionen – Ökumenische Perspektiven – Praktische Konkretionen: Franz Georg Untergaßmair zum 65. Geburtstag (Vechtaer Beiträge zur Theologie 13, Berlin: LIT Verlag, 2006), pp. 109–116.
(2016) offers a rereading of the role of Hagar in 4:21–31: Paul depicts her as an example of slavery, but in the light of Genesis 16 and 21, one should rather view her as somebody representing women who are abandoned, yet willing to take the risk to walk into the desert in hope of a better future. On the basis of 3:26–29, John Arierhi Ottuh
339325 B. Oestreich, Performanzkritik der Paulusbriefe (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.296, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152280-2
English version: B. Oestreich, Performance Criticism of the Pauline Letters (Biblical Performance Criticism Series 14, Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2016).
(2018) develops a liberation theology for Nigeria (similar to the liberation theology developed against apartheid), specifically aimed at liberating the ethnic minorities in Nigeria who are oppressed and subjugated by other ethnic groups who have the political and religious power. Hyon Jin Im
340326 D. Mitternacht, “Paul’s Letter to the Galatians in Social-Psychological Perspective”, in: J.H. Ellens and W.G. Rollins (eds.), Psychology and the Bible: A New Way to Read the Scriptures: Volume 3: From Gospels to Gnostics (Westport CT: Praeger, 2004), pp. 193–212. Updated version: D. Mitternacht, “Wahrnehmungen und Bewältigungen einer Krisensituation: Ein Beitrag zur psychologischen Analyse des Galaterbriefs”, in: G. Theißen and P. von Gemünden (eds.), Erkennen und Erleben: Beiträge zur psychologischen Erforschung des frühen Christentums (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2007), pp. 157–182.
(2020) offers a feminist phenomenological perspective on gender and indicates what it implies for artificial intelligence, based on the depiction of gender roles in Galatians and 1 Corinthians, as well as on Heidegger’s views on Dasein.
10.2 Feminist readings
According to Pamela Eisenbaum
341327 J.A. Kelhoffer, “Suppressing Anger in Early Christianity: Examples from the Pauline Tradition”, Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 47:3 (2007), pp. 307–325. Also available in: J.A. Kelhoffer, Conceptions of “Gospel” and Legitimacy in Early Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.324, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 317–334.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152993-1
(2000), who describes herself as a Jewish feminist, Paul had good intentions, but his views were used subsequently in an abominable way. Eisenbaum interprets 3:28 as articulating novel views on social relationships between people. Beverly Roberts Gaventa
342328 W.V. Harris, Restraining Rage: The Ideology of Anger Control in Classical Antiquity (Cambridge MA/London: Harvard University Press, 2001).
(2000) argues that although Paul does not address women directly in Galatians and the speakers, the audience and decisions are all male, this does not mean that one should abandon the letter, since it articulates a view of God’s new creation that are liberating for females and males. Angela Standhartinger
343329 D.E.N. King, “The Four Pauls and Their Letters: A Study in Personality-Critical Analysis”, Mental Health, Religion & Culture 15:9 (2012), pp. 863–871.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2012.677591
(2003) identifies three different hermeneutical approaches to 3:28 in feminist studies, and tests these approaches by analysing the notion found in Romans 7:1–6 pertaining to freedom from the law of the husband. According to Standhartinger, v. 28 does not only reflect social practices of women in Christian congregations in Paul’s time but also expresses his critique of “naturalistic” views of gender. Tatha Wiley
344330 L. Joelsson, Paul and Death: A Question of Psychological Coping (Routledge Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Biblical Criticism, New York NY:
(2005) views the Galatian crisis from the perspective of Gentile women in the congregations. The gospel proclaimed by Paul’s opponents implied a departure from the gender equality (for example, manifested in baptism and leadership) associated with Paul’s gospel. Letty M. Russell
345
(2006) offers an overview of the way in which 4:21–31 has been interpreted by male scholars and by female scholars following a feminist and postcolonial approach, thus noting the “twists and turns” both in Paul’s allegory and the way in which it has been interpreted. Brigitte Kahl
346331 C.T. Davis III, “The Evolution of a Pauline Toxic Text”, Pastoral Psychology 51:2 (2002), pp. 165–176.
(2012) interprets the perspective of Galatians on the “Others” as follows: The letter de-hierarchicalises all types of polarities and envisages a new way of living together with the “Others”, i.e., living a life based on love: “This biblically based anti-imperial, anti-Occidental concept of unity is the central theme not only of Galatians 3:26–28, but of Galatians as a whole”.
347332 B. Kahl, “Hagar between Genesis and Galatians: The Stony Road to Freedom”, in: C.A. Evans (ed.), From Prophecy to Testament: The Function of the Old Testament in the New (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2004), pp. 219–232.
In another contribution, Kahl
348333 Op. cit., p. 229.
(2013) draws attention to the way in which the Roman Emperor was depicted as world conqueror, god and father visually, for example in the Augustus Forum, and the different picture offered by Galatians. According to the letter, in Christ, people become part of a Messianic family, in which binary distinctions are replaced by hybrid horizontal relationships, in Paul’s terms: not Hagar but the free woman with her alternative metropole. Francisco Lozada Jr.
349334 D.K. Buell and C.J. Hodge, “The Politics of Interpretation: The Rhetoric of Race and Ethnicity in Paul”, Journal of Biblical Literature 123:2 (2004), pp. 235–251.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3267944
(2017) illustrates three different reading strategies by Latino/a Biblical scholars. One of these is an ideological reading strategy, illustrated by 2:11–14. Lozado shows how an ideological reading may be used to bring about a conversation in which an alternative ideology is proposed; in this instance, particularly regarding the notions of recognition and hospitality. Angela N. Parker
350335 J. Punt, “Revealing Rereading: Part 1: Pauline Allegory in Galatians 4:21–5:1; Part 2: Paul and the Wives of the Father of Faith in Galatians 4:21–5:1”, Neotestamentica 40:1 (2006), pp. 87–100; 101–118.
(2018) problematises Paul’s reference to the “marks of Jesus” on his body (6:17). From a feminist perspective, Parker criticises the privileged way in which Paul refers to his own body here, also the fact that he identifies himself as a slave and a mother. Instead, Parker highlights the notion of “bearing one another’s burdens” as a womanist action showing solidarity across gender and racial divides. Mitzi J. Smith
351336 M.B. Kartzow, “‘Asking the Other Question’: An Intersectional Approach to Galatians 3:28 and the Colossian Household Codes”, Biblical Interpretation 18:4/5 (2010), pp. 364–389.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156851510X517591
(2020) challenges Paul (“talks back” to Paul), since he exploits Hagar, an enslaved woman, in order to promote a gospel proclaiming freedom. Even Galatians 3:28 is challenged, since it normalises ethnic, class and gender binaries. Furthermore, 4:21–5:1 shows that there still is a distinction between slave and free amongst believers.
10.3 Gender-critical readings
According to Willi Braun
352337 M.B. Kartzow, “Towards an Intersectional Hermeneutics: Constructing Meaning with and Not of Galatians 3–4”, in: E.-M. Becker and K. Mtata (eds.), Pauline Hermeneutics: Exploring the “Power of the Gospel” (LWF Studies 2016/3, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2017), pp. 85–97.
(2002), Early Christianity was wholly an androcentric project. Even “women-friendly” texts such as 3:28 were based on a masculinised gender ideology. After a discussion of three examples of public Roman art in which conquered nations are represented by female bodies, Davina C. Lopez
353338 R. Echevarría, “Una Re-Lectura de la Alegoría de Agar y Sara en Gálatas 4:21–31”, Teología y Cultura 13:18 (2016), pp. 25–36.
(2005) points out how Paul suggests a totally different type of relationship between Jews and other nations, a “queer” type of relationship in the sense that it rejects the gender paradigms of the Empire, offering challenging alternatives. In a later work, Lopez
354339 J.A. Ottuh, Towards Ethnic Liberation Theology in Nigeria: A Polemic in a New Testament Perspective (Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2018).
(2008) presents a gender-critical reimaginative reading of Paul, interpreting the term “nations” as referring to all the nations conquered by the Romans. Accordingly, Galatians is interpreted as critical of imperialism and depicting a new creation in which the marginalised are victorious. In the contribution of Patrick S. Cheng
355340 H.J. Im, “A Feminist Phenomenological Study on Artificial ‘Female’ Intelligence and Technocapitalism”, 신학과 사회 34:1 (2020), pp. 89–127.
https://doi.org/10.22748/thesoc.2020.34.1.004
on Galatians in The Queer Bible Commentary (2006), the letter is read from the perspective of a gay male Christian of Asian descent who views the letter as critical of the actions of current false believers persecuting LGBT people because they think this is what God’s law requires of them. Dale B. Martin
356341 P. Eisenbaum, “Is Paul the Father of Misogyny and Antisemitism?”, Cross Currents 50:4 (2000), pp. 506–524.
(2006) argues that 3:28 does not address equality. Rather, it states that the inferior female form has been taken up in the perfected male form – a notion that is best avoided. Martin thus argues that the opposite should happen. What is masculine should be taken up in the feminine. Joseph A. Marchal
357342 B.R. Gaventa, “Is Galatians Just a ‘Guy Thing’? A Theological Reflection”, Interpretation 54:3 (2000), pp. 267–278.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002096430005400304
(2010) views Galatians from an intersex perspective. Marchal shows that Paul’s argumentation in the letter may be useful for an intersex critique but also shows how such a perspective challenges the way in which the letter is usually interpreted. Jeremy Punt
358343 A. Standhartinger, “Geschlechterkonstruktionen bei Paulus: Feministische Zugänge zu Galater 3,27f und Römer 7,1–6”, Una Sancta 58:4 (2003), pp. 339–349.
(2010) interprets 3:28 from a postcolonial, queer perspective. Although this text is not an emancipatory text in the true sense of the word, such an approach offers a different view of the text – a view focusing on people in liminal situations. In another contribution, Punt
359344 T. Wiley, Paul and the Gentile Women: Reframing Galatians (New York NY/London: Continuum, 2005).
(2013) challenges a simplistic understanding of Paul’s fraternal language in Galatians, in particular, if one takes issues such as gender and slavery into account. According to Punt, one should rather think in terms of a fragile type of fraternity in this letter. In a third contribution, Punt
360345 L.M. Russell, “Twists and Turns in Paul’s Allegory”, in: P. Trible and L.M. Russell (eds.), Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children: Jewish, Christian,
(2014) investigates the complex relationship between masculinity and lineage in the New Testament, in particular, the way in which the ambivalence around masculinity and the ever-changing role of genealogies gave rise to Paul’s intricate reasoning in 4:21–5:1. Valérie Nicolet
361
(Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox, 2006), pp. 71–97. and Muslim Perspectives
(2019) discusses references to “monstrous bodies” in Galatians (bodies that are not circumcised, female/maternal bodies, Paul’s body that is stigmatised and pregnant and the new body of believers). Nicolet shows how such bodies bring to light that notions of what “normal” implies are fragile and that there are no perfect bodies or communities. Jorunn Økland
362346 B. Kahl, “Galatians: On Discomfort About Gender and Other Problems of Otherness”, in: L. Schottroff, M.-T. Wacker, C. Janssen, B. Wehn and M. Rumscheidt (eds.), Feminist Biblical Interpretation: A Compendium of Critical Commentary on the Books of the Bible and Related Literature (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2012), pp. 755–766. English version of: B. Kahl, “Der Brief an die Gemeinden in Galatien: Vom Unbehagen der Geschlechter und anderen Problemen des Andersseins”, in: L. Schottroff, M.-T. Wacker, C. Janssen and B. Wehn (eds.), Kompendium feministische Bibelauslegung (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn, 1999, 2nd corrected edition), pp. 603–611.
(2019) discusses the variety of levels on which Paul engages with issues of gender/sexuality in his letters. In the case of Galatians, the way in which unity, equality and hierarchy, as well as the foreskin and inheritance are treated is discussed. Mayuko Yasuda
363347 Op. cit., p. 764.
(2019) destabilises the gender binary in 3:28 by means of queer criticism. The oneness in Christ differs totally from the notion of perfect masculinity that was dominant at that time and is rather a type of unity achieved by another type of power dynamics, i.e., a type of mobility moving downward. One of the texts that Halvor Moxnes
364348 B. Kahl, “Krieg, Maskulinität und der imperiale Gottvater: Das Augustusforum und die messianische Re-Imagination von ‘Hagar’ im Galaterbrief”, in: U.E. Eisen, C. Gerber and A. Standhartinger (eds.), Doing Gender – Doing Religion: Fallstudien zur Intersektionalität im frühen Judentum, Christentum und Islam (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.302, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013), pp. 273–300.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152368-7
(2020) discusses as part of a dialogue on household and gender in the context of New Testament writings and the church in Africa is 3:28. Moxnes emphasises that understanding gender is not an innocent process. It usually takes place in contexts in which people are trying to suppress critical perspectives from the Bible.
10.4 Post-colonial readings
GeneralLetty M. Russell
365349 F. Lozada Jr., Toward a Latino/a Biblical Interpretation (Resources for Biblical Study 91, Atlanta GA: SBL Press, 2017).
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1w6tf2p
(2006) offers an overview of the way in which 4:21–31 has been interpreted by male scholars and by female scholars following a feminist and postcolonial approach. In this way, Russell notes the “twists and turns” both in Paul’s allegory and the way in which it has been interpreted. Jeremy W. Barrier
366350 A.N. Parker, “One Womanist’s View of Racial Reconciliation in Galatians”, Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 34:2 (2018), pp. 23–40.
https://doi.org/10.2979/jfemistudreli.34.2.04
(2008) interprets the stigmata that Paul mentions in 6:17 from a postcolonial perspective as follows: They demonstrate Paul’s self-identity as a slave and his longing for a master worthy of his loyalty – a factor which, according to Barrier, makes the slavery metaphor undesirable and emphasises the necessity for Christians to look for better metaphors in our times. Brigitte Kahl
367351 M.J. Smith, “Hagar’s Children Still Ain’t Free: Paul’s Counterterror Rhetoric, Constructed Identity, Enslavement, and Galatians 3:28”, in: M.J. Smith and J.Y. Choi (eds.), Minoritized Women Reading Race and Ethnicity: Intersectional Approaches to Constructed Identity and Early Christian Texts (Lanham MD: Lexington Books, 2020), pp. 45–70.
(2011) shows how Galatians, and in particular, the notion of justification, has been colonised by various Western scholars, and instead, focuses on the way in which the letter overturns Self/“Other” binaries and thus can help one to find ways in which Galatian ethnicity may be reimagined. Roji T. George
368352 W. Braun, “Body, Character and the Problem of Femaleness in Early Christian Discourse”, Religion & Theology 9:1/2 (2002), pp. 108–117.
https://doi.org/10.1163/157430102X00061
(2016) objects to the way in which scholars have offered an essentialised description of Paul’s identity in Galatians. George explains Paul’s identity in non-essentialist hybrid terms: for Paul, Christ was “the third space” emancipating people from all unfair binaries. Pablo Virgilio S. David
369353 D.C. Lopez, “Paul, Gentiles, and Gender Paradigms”, Union Seminary Quarterly Review 59:3/4 (2005), pp. 92–106.
(2018) criticises colonial interpretations of 3:28 that easily develop into a notion of Western triumphalism. David focuses on the fact that Paul believed that being in Christ enabled people to transcend differentiations. Jennifer T. Kaalund
370354 D.C. Lopez, Apostle to the Conquered: Reimagining Paul’s Mission (Paul in Critical Contexts, Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press, 2008).
(2020) offers a feminist postcolonial reading of 3:28, challenging the way in which Paul tries to construct Christian identity as something that is “in Christ” but “not of Christ”. Kaalund contends that one should not practise disembodied readings of Biblical texts, since this gives rise to disembodied theological constructions.African readingsG. Daan Cloete
371355 P.S. Cheng, “Galatians”, in: D. Guest, R.E. Goss, M. West and Bohache (eds.), The Queer Bible Commentary (London: SCM, 2006), pp. 624–629.
(2003) reads Galatians by means of a “rainbow hermeneutics” within the post-apartheid context in South Africa. Cloete interprets the letter with Africa, in the context of the South African renaissance, but also in dialogue with the original situation in which the letter was composed. Accordingly, the emphasis falls on the role that believers can play in creating the dream of an inclusive and just society. Aliou Cissé Niang (2009)
372356 D.B. Martin, “The Queer History of Galatians 3:28: ‘No Male and Female’”, in: D.B. Martin (ed.), Sex and the Single Savior: Gender and Sexuality in Biblical Interpretation (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2006), pp. 77–90.
reads the letter through the lens of the experiences of colonialism as experienced by the Diola people in Senegal, West Africa, i.e., by means of sociopostcolonial hermeneutics. The colonial objectification of the Diola is compared to what the Galatians experienced, with emphasis on Paul’s role in bringing about change in this regard. From a Nigerian cultural perspective, Adewale J. Adelakun
373357 J.A. Marchal, “Bodies Bound for Circumcision and Baptism: An Intersex Critique and the Interpretation of Galatians”, Theology & Sexuality 16:2 (2010), pp. 163–182.
https://doi.org/10.1558/tse.v16i2.163
Updated version: J.A. Marchal, Appalling Bodies: Queer Figures before and after Paul’s Letters (New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2019), pp. 68–112.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190060312.001.0001
(2012) contends that both egalitarian and complementarian readings of 3:28 are wrong, since they apply the verse to the rights of women in church and society. Paul focused on soteriological issues, not on leadership struggles. J. Ayodeji Adewuya
374358 J. Punt, “Power and Liminality, Sex and Gender, and Gal 3:28: A Postcolonial, Queer Reading of an Influential Text”, Neotestamentica 44:1 (2010), pp. 140–166.
(2014) reads the African story in the light of the same verse. Although Paul does not support the elimination of social differences, they are irrelevant in Christ. Adewuya thus shows how Africans reading this verse can experience the same feeling of liberation that Paul expresses here.African American readingsBrad Ronnell Braxton
375359 J. Punt, “Pauline Brotherhood, Gender and Slaves: Fragile Fraternity in Galatians”, Neotestamentica 47:1 (2013), pp. 149–169.
(2002) interprets Galatians from the perspective of the experiences of African Americans. Although slavery has been outlawed for a long time in the US, an ideological form of slavery continues, from which the letter can liberate people.Asian/Asian-American readingsSze-kar Wan
376360 J. Punt, “Writing Genealogies, Constructing Men: Masculinity and Lineage in the New Testament in Roman Times”, Neotestamentica 48:2 (2014), pp. 303–323.
(2000) interprets Galatians from an Asian-American perspective, specifically by means of a diaspora hermeneutics which, according to Wan, implies a kind of universality that should operate through dialogue and cooperation. Duk Ki Kim
377361 V. Nicolet, “Monstrous Bodies in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, in: J.A. Marchal (ed.), Bodies on the Verge: Queering Pauline Epistles (Semeia Studies 93, Atlanta GA: SBL Press, 2019), pp. 115–142.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvh4zh7m.8
(2009) investigates 3:28 in order to suggest new modes of East-Asian cultural identity, subjectivity and political solidarity in the light of Paul’s views on Christ as the Messiah.(See also the discussion of studies highlighting the Roman Empire as context, earlier in this chapter.)
11. Other approaches
11.1 Literary analysis
Carlos Raúl Sosa Siliezar
378362 J. Økland, “Pauline Letters”, in: B.H. Dunning (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of New Testament, Gender, and Sexuality (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019), pp. 315–332.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190213398.013.14
(2012) offers a literary analysis of 5:1–6, highlighting significant semantic aspects in the pericope and the relationships between the different verses. An inclusion between vv. 1 and 5–6 is discussed, an ellipsis in v. 6 is identified and several semantic parallels in vv. 2–4 are pointed out.
11.2 Philosophical perspectives
Ian W. Scott
379363 M. Yasuda, “‘One in Christ’: Where the Gender Binary Is Transcended: Queering the Gender Binary in Galatians 3:28c ‘No Male and Female’”, Siwô’ Revista de Teología/Revista de Estudios Sociorreligiosos 12:1 (2019), pp. 101–118.
https://doi.org/10.15359/siwo.12-1.4
(2006) asks the question as to the kind of epistemology that Paul employed when he tried to lead people to greater knowledge. According to Scott, the answer to this question is partly found in Galatians. On this basis, Scott goes on to argue that Paul basically tried to “emplot” his readers within a theological narrative which he believed to be better than that of the opponents.
11.3 Logical analysis
After a thorough discussion of the way in which Aristotelian and Stoic logic functioned in antiquity, Moisé Mayordomo
380364 H. Moxnes, “Household and Gender: Interpretation in Dialogue between the Contexts of the New Testament and Contemporary Cultures”, Stellenbosch Theological Journal 6:1 (2020), pp. 103–122.
https://doi.org/10.17570/stj.2020.v6n1.a07
(2005) discusses three Pauline texts, namely 1 Corinthians 15:12–19, Galatians 3:6–14 and Romans 1:18–3:20. In each case, the particular text is investigated exegetically before a detailed analysis of its logic is provided. Debbie Hunn
381365 L.M. Russell, “Twists and Turns in Paul’s Allegory”, in: P. Trible and L.M. Russell (eds.), Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives (Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox, 2006), pp. 71–97.
(2018) disagrees with scholars who are of the opinion that 3:13–14 is based on unproven assertions. Instead, Hunn argues that Paul’s argument is based on common grounds and that logically, it made and still makes sense.
11.4 Register analysis
David I. Yoon
382366 J.W. Barrier, “Marks of Oppression: A Postcolonial Reading of Paul’s stigmata in Galatians 6:17”, Biblical Interpretation 16:4 (2008), pp. 336–362.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156851508X329656
(2014/2015) uses register analysis to identify the end of Paul’s words to Peter in 2:11–21. Such an analysis shows that Paul’s words to Peter end at v. 21 and not at v. 14.
11.5 Speech act theory
Pieter Verster
383367 B. Kahl, “Galatians and the ‘Orientalism’ of Justification by Faith: Paul among Jews and Muslims”, in: C.D. Stanley (ed.), The Colonized Apostle: Paul through Postcolonial Eyes (Paul in Critical Contexts, Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2011), pp. 206–222.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1hqdj44.19
(2007) utilises speech act theory to distinguish between various types of non-authentic questions in Galatians. This makes it possible to describe the intended effect of each question more accurately. Verster discusses the following non-authentic questions in this regard: 1:10, 2:14, 17; 3:1–5, 19, 21; 4:9, 15–16, 21, 30; 5:7 and 11.
11.6 Cognitive science approaches
Colleen Shantz
384368 R.T. George, Paul’s Identity in Galatians: A Postcolonial Appraisal (New Delhi: Christian World Imprints, 2016).
(2013) illustrates the usefulness of a cognitive science approach by considering 3:28 from such a perspective. Shantz focuses in particular on the contribution of emotions to social action. In this instance, the role that disgust plays in identifying social differences is highlighted. Jason N. Yuh
385369 P.V.S. David, “A Postcolonial Reading of Galatians 3:28”, in: D.F. Pilario, F. Wilfred and H.P. Ho (eds.), Asian Christianities (2018/1, London: SCM, 2018), pp. 37–45.
(2019) utilises cognitive science, memory studies, theories on embodiment and ritual to explain why Paul’s brief reference to baptism in 3:27 would have been effective. According to Yuh, Paul uses it to strengthen his authority over the Galatians, but also to underline his solidarity with them.370 J.T. Kaalund, “In Christ, but Not of Christ: Reading Identity Differences Differently in the Letter to the Galatians”, in: M.J. Smith and J.Y. Choi (eds.), Minoritized Women Reading Race and Ethnicity: Intersectional Approaches to Constructed Identity and Early Christian Texts (Feminist Studies and Sacred Texts Series, Lanham MD: Lexington Books, 2020), pp. 23–44. 371 G.D. Cloete, “Rainbow Hermeneutics and St Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, in: J.M. Court (ed.), Biblical Interpretation: The Meanings of Scripture – Past and Present (London/New York NY: T & T Clark International, 2003), pp. 268–283. 372 A.C. Niang, Faith and Freedom in Galatia and Senegal: The Apostle Paul, Colonists and Sending Gods (Biblical Interpretation Series 97, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009).
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004175228.i-184
373 A.J. Adelakun, “Complementarians versus Egalitarians: An Exegesis of Galatians 3:28 from Nigerian Cultural Perspective”, Ogbomoso Journal of Theology 17:3 (2012), pp. 77–95. 374 J.A. Adewuya, “Galatians 3:28 and the African Story”, in: D.L. Matson and K.C. Richardson (eds.), One in Christ Jesus: Essays on Early Christianity and “All That Jazz,” in Honor of S. Scott Bartchy (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2014), pp. 184–198. 375 B.R. Braxton, No Longer Slaves: Galatians and African American Experience (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2002). See also the contribution on Galatians in An African American New Testament Commentary: B.R. Braxton, “Galatians”, in: B.K. Blount (ed.), True to Our Native Land: An African American New Testament Commentary (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2007), pp. 333–347. 376 S.-k. Wan, “Does Diaspora Identity Imply Some Sort of Universality? An Asian-American Reading of Galatians”, in: F.F. Segovia (ed.), Interpreting Beyond Borders (The Bible and Postcolonialism 3, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), pp. 107–131. See also S.-k. Wan, “The Letter to the Galatians”, in: F.F. Segovia and R.S. Sugirtharajah (eds.), A Postcolonial Commentary on the New Testament Writings (The Bible and Postcolonialism 13, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2009), pp. 246‑264. 377 D.K. Kim, “Paul’s Cultural-Political Theology and East Asian Biblical Hermeneutics: Postcolonial Identity and Solidarity in Gal 3:28”, in: Y.M. Lee (ed.), Mapping and Engaging the Bible in Asian Cultures: Congress of the Society of Asian Biblical Studies 2008 Seoul Conference (Seoul: Christian Literature Society of Korea, 2009), pp. 141–173. 378 C.R. Sosa Siliezar, “Análisis Literario y Exegético de Gálatas 5:1–6”, DavarLogos 11:1 (2012), pp. 57–79. 379 I.W. Scott, Implicit Epistemology in the Letters of Paul: Story, Experience and the Spirit (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.205, Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 2006).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157062-9
380 M. Mayordomo, Argumentiert Paulus logisch? Eine Analyse vor dem Hintergrund antiker Logik (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.188, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157301-9
381 D. Hunn, “Galatians 3:13–14: Mere Assertion?”, The Westminster Theological Journal 80:1 (2018), pp. 141–157. 382 D.I. Yoon, “Identifying the End of Paul’s Speech to Peter in Galatians 2: Register Analysis as a Heuristic Tool”, Filología Neotestamentaria 28/29 (2014/2015), pp. 57–79. 383 P. Verster, “The Implications of Non-Authentic Questions in Galatians”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 9 (2007), pp. 142–161.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v28i2.52344
384 C. Shantz, “Emotion, Cognition, and Social Change: A Consideration of Galatians 3:28”, in: I. Czachesz and R. Uro (eds.), Mind, Morality and Magic: Cognitive Science Approaches in Biblical Studies (Bible World, Durham: Acumen, 2013), pp. 251–270. 385 J.N. Yuh, “Analysing Paul’s Reference to Baptism in Galatians 3.27 through Studies of Memory, Embodiment and Ritual”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 41:4 (2019), pp. 478–500.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064x19832207
Chapter 5:
The Theology of the Letter
1. Approaches to the theology of the letter
This section is devoted to studies specifically focusing on the theology of Galatians. Studies discussing approaches to Paul’s theology in general are thus not discussed.Teodor Ioan Colda
11 T.I. Colda, “Argumentul Teologic al lui Pavel în Epistola către Galateni în Baza Categoriilor Nou și Vechi, Adevărat și Fals”, Jurnal Teologic 11:1 (2012), pp. 126–142.
(2012) is of the opinion that the message of Galatians can be reconstructed by focusing on the conflicts reflected in the letter: old Paul/new Paul, Gentiles/Jews, faith/works, blessing/curse, sonship/slavery, new covenant/old covenant, and false teachers/true teachers. Todd D. Still
22 T.D. Still, “‘Once Upon a Time’: Galatians as an Apocalyptic Story”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 2:2 (2012), pp. 133–141.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26426552
(2012) believes that it is possible to combine narrative and apocalyptic approaches to the interpretation of the letter and illustrates this by first identifying temporal lines in the letter and then considering the story found in the letter in terms of Greimas’s semiotic approach. Paul David Landgraf
33 P.D. Landgraf, “A Cinderella Story: The Role of Galatians within a Gospel Canon”, in: H.C. Kim (ed.), Galatians as Examined by Diverse Academics in 2012 (St. Andrews, Scotland) (Hermit Kingdom Studies in Christianity and Judaism 3, Highland Park: The Hermit Kingdom Press, 2013), pp. 135–163.
(2013) contends that the position of Galatians as the fourth Pauline letter should be taken seriously and that it forms the closure of an intended fourfold structure, meant to support the fourfold gospel. Jens Schröter
44 J. Schröter, “‘The New Perspective on Paul’: Eine Anfrage an die Lutherische Paulusdeutung?”, Lutherjahrbuch 80 (2013), pp. 142–158.
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666874451.142
(2013) discusses the implications of the New Perspective on Paul for the Lutheran understanding of Paul, in particular by looking at 1:15–17. Schröter highlights the importance of the notion of God’s justifying grace but also points out that the social and ecclesiological implications of this idea sometimes do not receive enough attention in Lutheran circles. Thomas Söding
55 T. Söding, “Theologie im Dialog: Der Galater- und Römerbrief als Paradigma”, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 111:4 (2014), pp. 374–388.
https://doi.org/10.1628/004435414X14135326005915
(2014) uses Galatians and Romans to illustrate how a dialogue in theological circles may work. Although there are many similarities between the two letters, there are also significant differences, thus indicating that in oecumenical dialogue, both approaches are necessary. Vasile Mihoc
66 V. Mihoc, “Galatians 2:15–21: A Commentary Challenging the ‘New Perspective on Paul’”, in: A. Despotis (ed.), Participation, Justification, and Conversion: Eastern Orthodox Interpretation of Paul and the Debate between “Old and New Perspectives on Paul” (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.442, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), pp. 159–185.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155453-7
(2017) offers an interpretation of 2:15–21 challenging the New Perspective on Paul. Mihoc also believes that the Antioch incident did not cause a final falling-out between Peter and Paul. According to Samuel J. Tedder
77 S.J. Tedder, Children of Laughter and the Re-Creation of Humanity: The Theological Vision and Logic of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2020).
(2020), 4:21–5:1 is central to Paul’s argument in the letter. Tedder prefers to describe Paul’s approach as essentially intertextual in that Paul grounds his interpretation of the gospel in the Hebrew Scriptures as they have been reconfigured by the coming of Christ. For Paul the “Jerusalem above” was the inaugurated restoration reality characterised by the rule and presence of God.
2. Paul: Self-understanding
On the basis of 4:12–20, Scott J. Hafemann
88 S.J. Hafemann, “‘Because of Weakness’ (Galatians 4:13): The Role of Suffering in the Mission of Paul”, in: P. Bolt and M. Thompson (eds.), The Gospel to the Nations: Perspectives on Paul’s Mission (Downers Grove IL: Intervarsity Press, 2000), pp. 131–146. Updated version: S.J. Hafemann, Paul: Servant of the New Covenant: Pauline Polarities in Eschatological Perspective (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.435, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019), pp. 142–164.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157702-4
(2000) argues that Paul regarded his suffering not merely as a consequence of his gospel. He viewed it rather as constitutive of his message: “Paul’s suffering was the vehicle through which the saving power of God, climactically revealed in Christ, was being made known in the world. To reject the suffering Paul was therefore to reject Christ.”
99 Op. cit., p. 140.
Charles Ensminger
1010 C. Ensminger, “Paul the Stigmatic”, Journal of Higher Criticism 8:2 (2001), pp. 183–209.
(2001) interprets 6:17 as an indication that Paul literally bore stigmata and that he used this fact in the letter for validating his gospel and for authenticating his claim that Christ was revealed through him. Christos K. Economou
1111 C.K. Economou, “Paul’s Ecumenical Mission”, The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 47:1/4 (2002), pp. 199–213.
(2002) links Paul’s ecumenical mission to the Damascus event when he realised that Christ was the fulfilment of the Jewish law. This changed him from being a persecutor of the church to being an apostle to the Gentiles, and from Jewish introversion to an ecumenical view. Caroline Johnson Hodge
1212 C.J. Hodge, “Apostle to the Gentiles: Constructions of Paul’s Identity”, Biblical Interpretation 13:3 (2005), pp. 270–288.
https://doi.org/10.1163/1568515054388146
(2005) approaches the way in which Paul constructed his identity as a teacher of the Gentiles from the perspective of anthropology and critical race theory. Paul described himself in terms of multiple identities and shifted among them depending on what would serve his argument best. In 2:11–14, he is thus depicted as willing to forgo some practices of the law (part of a Judean identity) in order to interact with Gentiles. Kathy Ehrensperger
1313 K. Ehrensperger, Paul and the Dynamics of Power: Communication and Interaction in the Early Christ-Movement (Library of New Testament Studies 325, London: T & T Clark, 2007), pp. 81–86.
(2007) interprets 1:15–16 as an indication that Paul located his encounter with the Risen Christ in the prophetic discourse of Scripture, with “grace” as a reference to his calling by God. For Paul, being called by God and being sent by him was one event. Sigurd Grindheim
1414 S. Grindheim, “Apostate Turned Prophet: Paul’s Prophetic Self-Understanding and Prophetic Hermeneutic with Special Reference to Galatians 3.10–12”, New Testament Studies 53:4 (2007), pp. 545–565.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688507000276
(2007) describes Paul as an apostate that became a prophet. According to Grindheim, Paul regarded his fellow-Jews, as well as himself during his time as Pharisee, as apostates. Grindheim believes that such a perspective helps one to understand Paul’s use of Deuteronomy 27:26 and Leviticus 18:5 in 3:10–12 better. Paul read these texts in terms of the prophetic tradition, according to which they were regarded as the ground for divine judgement on Israel. Based on a careful study of 1:15–17 and 1 Corinthians 15:8 (in particular, Paul’s language about abortion), Matthew W. Mitchell
1515 M.W. Mitchell, Abortion and the Apostolate: A Study in Pauline Conversion, Rhetoric, and Scholarship (Gorgias Biblical Studies 42, Piscataway NJ: Gorgias, 2009).
https://doi.org/10.31826/9781463236229
(2009) argues that the fact that Paul’s claims to be an apostle were rejected, gave rise to his mission to the Gentiles. Chulhong B. Kim
1616 C.B. Kim, “Why Did Paul Go to Arabia? Paul’s Prophetic Self-Understanding Revealed in Galatians 1:17”, 신약논단 16:1 (2009), pp. 173–198.
(2009) proposes that Paul went to Arabia (1:17) because he identified with the Servant of the Lord and followed Isaiah 66:19. James A. Kelhoffer
1717 J.A. Kelhoffer, “Suffering as Defense of Paul’s Apostolic Authority in Galatians and 2 Corinthians 11”, Svensk Exegetisk Årsbok 74 (2009), pp. 127–143. Also available in: J.A. Kelhoffer, Conceptions of “Gospel” and Legitimacy in Early Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.324, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 187–202.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152993-1
(2009) explains how Paul uses the notion of suffering as a defence of his apostolic authority. In the case of Galatians, Kelhoffer discusses 4:29, 5:11, 6:12 and 6:17. The point that Paul tries to get across is that his opponents avoided persecution whereas he was willing to suffer for the gospel – a state of affairs that confirms his status as an apostle. After a thorough investigation of 1 Corinthians 9:1, 15:8, 2 Corinthians 4:6 and Galatians 1:12–16, Ingo Broer
1818 I. Broer, “Die Erscheinung des Auferstandenen vor Paulus bei Damaskus”, in: M. Bachmann and B. Kollmann (eds.), Umstrittener Galaterbrief: Studien zur Situierung und Theologie des Paulus-Schreibens (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 106, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Theologie, 2010), pp. 57–93.
(2010) concludes that Paul must have experienced the appearance of the risen Christ as a very complex event with many facets, since he recounted it in a variety of ways and always from a perspective linked to the situation in which his readers found themselves. Broer also suggests that this variety may be the result of later reflection by Paul. Hans Klein
1919 H. Klein, “Die Selbstverteidigung des Gottgesandten bei Paulus und Johannes”, Sacra Scripta: Journal of the Centre for Biblical Studies 8:2 (2010), pp. 175–184.
(2010) focuses on the way in which Paul and John defend their roles as messengers of God (“Gottgesandten”). All that they can do is to refer to themselves and their mission, but there is no absolute proof that they can offer. In the case of Galatians, Paul refers to his suffering (the marks that he carries; 6:17) as evidence of his apostleship. Bertram Schmitz
2020 B. Schmitz, Paulus und der Koran (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010), pp. 141–151.
(2010) points out that, in spite of the great differences between Islam and Christianity, the same goal dominates the literature of both religions, namely proving that it is the only true religion of God. In the case of Galatians, Schmitz notes that both Paul and the Koran speak from an absolute self-confidence (“absolute Selbstsicherheit”). Accordingly, both insist that they are right since they link themselves directly to God. On the basis of 2:15–16, 1 Corinthians 15:9–10 and Philippians 3:4–11, Johnny Awwad
2121 J. Awwad, “From Saul to Paul: The Conversion of Paul the Apostle”, Theological Review 32:1 (2011), pp. 3–14.
(2011) describes Paul’s experience as follows: He experienced a Christophany in that Christ revealed himself to him. This became the content of his gospel, and from then onwards he viewed his task as carrying the person of Christ (which dwelled in him) all over the world. According to Brian Schmisek
2222 B. Schmisek, “Paul’s Vision of the Risen Lord”, Biblical Theology Bulletin 41:2 (2011), pp. 76–83.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146107911403652
(2011), on the basis of 1:16, 1 Corinthians 9:1 and 15:8, one may interpret what happened to Paul as an interior but real experience. Paul Bony
2323 P. Bony, “La conversion, ou les conversions, de saint Paul?”, Bulletin de Littérature Ecclésiastique 112:1 (2011), pp. 85–104.
(2011) suggests that Paul had two conversions. The second one occurred somewhere between the writing of 1 Thessalonians and Romans, since his feelings towards the Jews seem to have changed. This might have been due to his reflection on the mystery of the election of Israel. Joel Antônio Ferreira
2424 J.A. Ferreira, “A Vocação de Paulo em Gálatas”, Revista Pistis & Praxis 5:2 (2013), pp. 425–441.
https://doi.org/10.7213/revistapistispraxis.05.002.DS06
(2013) highlights four fundamental concepts in the depiction of Paul’s calling in 1:11–17a: revelation, election, vocation and mission. Paul’s calling thus gave rise to his missionary spirit. John Anthony Dunne
2525 J.A. Dunne, “Cast out the Aggressive Agitators (Gl 4:29–30): Suffering, Identity, and the Ethics of Expulsion in Paul’s Mission to the Galatians”, in: J. Kok, T. Nicklas, D.T. Roth and C.M. Hays (eds.), Sensitivity Towards Outsiders: Exploring the Dynamic Relationship between Mission and Ethics in the New Testament and Early Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.364, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 246–269.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157504-4
(2014) disagrees with scholars who interpret 4:30 as a warning to the recipients against embracing the law. Dunne believes that it serves as both a command and a warning and that it reflects Paul’s belief that Christian identity presupposes suffering with the crucified Christ. Paul’s views in this regard were based on his understanding of his mission in terms of the Servant of Isaiah. Rodney Reeves
2626 R. Reeves, “The New Moses of the Law of Christ: Paul in Galatians”, Criswell Theological Review 12:2 (2015), pp. 71–82.
(2015) claims that “Paul saw himself as the mediator of the law of Christ, the ‘new’ Moses of the Abrahamic covenant fulfilled in Christ Jesus. Paul was the one who delivered the gospel to them, and therefore he was the only one appointed by God to interpret the law of Christ for them.”
2727 Op. cit., p. 72.Karl Olav Sandnes
2828 K.O. Sandnes, “Prophet-Like Apostle: A Note on the ‘Radical New Perspective’ in Pauline Studies”, Biblica 96:4 (2015), pp. 550–564.
(2015) disagrees with scholars who explain Paul’s apostolate only in terms of a prophetic model. Sandnes is of the opinion that one should also consider the notion of a “slow conversion” – a process initiated in Paul by the Damascus event. One of the passages that Arthur J. Dewey
2929 A.J. Dewey, “Per omnia saecula saeculorum: Worlds Colliding and Created”, Forum 4:1 (2015), pp. 7–23.
(2015) considers in an investigation of the prophetic vein in developing traditions in Early Christianity is 1:11–16. Dewey points out that Paul described his calling in prophetic terms. This was not a mystical experience but rather a prophetic vision with far-reaching social implications. According to Benjamin J. Lappenga
3030 B.J. Lappenga, Paul’s Language of ζῆλος: Monosemy and the Rhetoric of Identity and Practice (Biblical Interpretation Series 137, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2016).
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004302457
(2016), the model that Paul has in mind in 1:14 is Elijah: “[H]is Elijah-like zeal (1 Kgs 19:14–18) has been redirected in light of his calling as an Isaianic servant-like apostle to the Gentiles (Isa 49:1–6).”
3131 Op. cit., p. 146.Thomas E. Phillips
3232 T.E. Phillips, “When Did Paul Become a Christian? Rereading Paul’s Autobiography in Galatians and Biography in Acts”, in: M. Froelich, M. Kochenash, T.E. Phillips and I. Park (eds.), Christian Origins and the New Testament in the Greco-Roman Context: Essays in Honor of Dennis R. Macdonald (Claremont Studies in New Testament and Christian Origins, Claremont CA: Claremont Press, 2015), pp. 180–201.
(2015) believes that if one uses only Paul’s letters as source, it is clear that he became a Christian before he started to persecute the church. At first, he shared the views of people such as Peter and James and resisted the inclusion of Gentiles into the church, persecuting them in a non-violent way. After his experience of the Christophany, he changed his mind, and accordingly, then faced a similar non-violent opposition from leaders such as Peter and James. Markus Öhler
3333 M. Öhler, “Die Erwählung der Heiden und ihrer Apostel”, Protokolle zur Bibel 16:1 (2016), pp. 25–42.
(2016) discusses the semantic field of “election” in the New Testament and thus also Paul’s calling narrated in 1:11–17. In this instance, Öhler highlights Paul’s self-understanding as a chosen apostle to the Gentiles. This made him independent of others and sure that he was on the right path. Karl Olav Sandnes
3434 K.O. Sandnes, “Paul, an Isaianic Prophet?”, in: T. Wasserman, G. Andersson and D. Willgren (eds.), Studies in Isaiah: History, Theology and Reception (Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 654, London/New York NY: Bloomsbury Publishing/T & T Clark, 2017), pp. 139–156.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567667199_0014
(2017) is of the opinion that Paul’s self-concept was rooted in the prophetic tradition in Israel, in particular Isaiah 40–66. In the case of Galatians, Sandnes draws attention to a cluster of motifs found in 1:15–16a and 2:2. Martin Meiser
3535 M. Meiser, “Die Selbstpräsentation des Paulus im Galaterbrief im Vergleich mit antiker rhetorischer und epistolographischer Praxis”, Sacra Scripta 18:1 (2020), pp. 7–35.
(2020) compares the way in which Paul represents himself in Galatians with insights from ancient rhetorical handbooks and speeches delivered by Cicero. Meiser points out that Paul’s self-representation in the letter would probably not have been experienced by his readers as something unusual. Furthermore, in terms of rhetorical practice in Paul’s time, it was not regarded as inappropriate to utilise negative effects, as long as they served the purpose of the argument.
3. Tradition behind the letter
In a contribution on Paul’s views of the origins of the Christian tradition, James A. Kelhoffer
3636 J.A. Kelhoffer, “The Struggle to Define ‘Heilsgeschichte’: Paul on the Origins of the Christian Tradition”, Biblical Research 47 (2002), pp. 45–67. Updated version: J.A. Kelhoffer, Conceptions of “Gospel” and Legitimacy in Early Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.324, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 97–120.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152993-1
(2002) argues that Paul’s letters reflect a situation in the Early Church when accounts of the origins of the tradition were still being contested. In particular, Galatians attests to Paul’s concern to show that his gospel corresponded to the Hebrew Scriptures and the relevance of his calling for the notion of authority in the Early Church. Troy W. Martin
3737 T.W. Martin, “The Covenant of Circumcision (Genesis 17:9–14) and the Situational Antitheses in Galatians 3:28”, Journal of Biblical Literature 122:1 (2003), pp. 111–125.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3268093
(2003) identifies several problems in the hypothesis that 3:28 is based on a baptismal formula, amongst others that such a view presupposes that it was not adapted to its situation by Paul. Martin argues that one should rather link the three antitheses to the situational context of the letter and particularly to the fact that they can all be linked to the covenant of circumcision – an issue that was central to the Galatian controversy. In an overview of Early Christian tradition in the theology of Paul, Mária Kardis
3838 M. Kardis, “Early Christian Tradition in Theology of Apostle Paul”, E-Theologos: Theological Revue of Greek Catholic Theological Faculty 2:1 (2011), pp. 56–66.
https://doi.org/10.2478/v10154-011-0006-1
(2011) discusses traditions about Jesus’ death in 1:4 and 2:20. Bernard C. Lategan
3939 B.C. Lategan, “Reconsidering the Origin and Function of Galatians 3:28”, Neotestamentica 46:2 (2012), pp. 274–286. See also: B.C. Lategan, “Some Remarks on the Origin and Function of Galatians 3:28”, in: J. Krans, B.J. Lietaert Peerbolte, P.-B. Smit and A. Zwiep (eds.), Paul, John, and Apocalyptic Eschatology: Studies in Honour of Martinus C. de Boer (Novum Testamentum Supplements 149, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2013), pp. 15–29.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004250369_003
(2012) finds the notion of a pre-Pauline origin of 3:28 implausible, in particular because of the fact that it gives rise to the following logical problem: Scholars claim that Paul makes an original statement but then, at the same time, assume that he uses a pre-Pauline formula. Instead, Lategan proposes that it should be understood as a conscious statement by Paul himself. Štefan Paluchník
4040 Š. Paluchník, “Der Apostel Paulus und die älteren christlichen Traditionen”, Communio Viatorum 58:1 (2016), pp. 55–76.
(2016) examines the way in which Paul handled older traditions. One of the examples that are discussed is 3:26–29, in which case Paluchník accepts that Paul made use of a pre-Pauline baptismal tradition.
4. The theology of the letter as a whole
The contribution by N. Tom Wright
4141 N.T. Wright, “The Letter to the Galatians: Exegesis and Theology”, in: J.B. Green and M. Turner (eds.), Between Two Horizons: Spanning New Testament Studies and Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2000), pp. 205–236. Take note that Wright’s outline is based on the presupposition of the importance of the covenant for understanding Paul’s theology (p. 231). Wright already discussed this in detail in earlier studies, e.g., N.T. Wright, The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 1991), pp. 137–174.
(2000) was determined by the question as to what the theology of the letter could contribute in an interdisciplinary dialogue with Systematic Theology. From this perspective, what the letter says about God and Christ thus received the most emphasis. For example, in the first instance, Wright emphasises that Paul speaks about the one God of Israel, and that he believes that this God has a purpose for the created world, that he is revealed through the Jewish Scriptures, and that he acts within history, which had its climax in the coming of the Messiah. I. Howard Marshall
4242 I.H. Marshall, New Testament Theology: Many Witnesses, One Gospel (Downers Grove IL/Leicester: Intervarsity Press/Apollos, 2004), pp. 209–235. See also I.H. Marshall, A Concise New Testament Theology (Downers Grove, Il/Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press Academic, 2008), pp. 82–90.
(2004) identifies and discusses the following important themes in the theology of Galatians: salvation history, justification, the cross and its effects, Paul’s message and the Jewish Scriptures (Abraham, the law) and the Holy Spirit. Frank Thielman
4343 F. Thielman, Theology of the New Testament: A Canonical and Synthetic Approach (Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan, 2005), pp. 262–275.
(2005) depicts the theology of the New Testament by means of “a canonical and synthetic approach”, and highlights three important aspects of the gospel in Galatians: its chronological, anthropological and ethical dimensions. Frank J. Matera
4444 F.J. Matera, New Testament Theology: Exploring Diversity and Unity (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2007), pp. 151–167.
(2007) summarises the theology of Galatians as a “theology of righteousness”, emphasising the following issues: the relationship between Paul’s apostleship and the truth of the gospel, the law in the light of the gospel, the gospel and moral life, and Israel, the church and the truth of the gospel. John K. Riches
4545 J.K. Riches, “Galatians”, in: K.J. Vanhoozer, D.J. Treier and N.T. Wright (eds.), Theological Interpretation of the New Testament: A Book-by-Book Survey (Grand Rapids MI/London: Baker Academic/SPCK, 2008), pp. 115–123.
(2008) approaches the theology of the letter in terms of its history of interpretation and focuses on the following themes: guidance by the Spirit and spiritual freedom, justification by faith instead of justification by works, anthropology (the flesh versus the Spirit), the depiction of others in the letter and the place of the letter within the canon. Detlev Dormeyer
4646 D. Dormeyer, Einführung in die Theologie des Neuen Testaments (Einführung Theologie, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2010), pp. 49–60.
(2010) discusses the theology of Galatians and Romans together, highlighting issues such as justification and sonship of God through faith, Jesus’ atoning death, freedom from the law and Israel as God’s people. Ulrich Wilckens
4747 U. Wilckens, Theologie des Neuen Testaments: Band 1: Geschichte der urchristlichen Theologie: Teilband 3: Die Briefe des Urchristentums: Paulus und seine Schüler, Theologen aus dem Bereich judenchristlicher Heidenmission (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2011), pp. 131–164.
(2011) emphasises the theological focus (“Profilierung”) that occurred in Galatians as a response to Paul’s opponents. For Wilckens, the doctrine of justification is the central concept in the letter. Wilckens begins by tracing its development prior to Galatians and then discusses the way in which it features in the letter itself, concluding with the concept of living in the Spirit as liberty from the law. Udo Schnelle
4848 U. Schnelle, Paulus: Leben und Denken (De Gruyter Lehrbuch, Berlin/New York NY: Walter de Gruyter, 2014, 2nd edition), pp. 275–315. English version: U. Schnelle, Apostle Paul: His Life and Theology. Translated by M. Eugene Boring (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2005).
(2014) describes what happened between Paul and the Galatians as “Erkenntnis im Konflikt” and focuses on Paul’s teaching on the law and justification in the letter. Schnelle takes 2:16 as his point of departure (“Von Gott gerechtfertigte Existenz kann für Paulus nicht aus Werken des Gesetz resultieren”
4949 Schnelle, Paulus, p. 290.
) and then follows the logic of the letter further in explaining its theology. A. Andrew Das
5050 A.A. Das, Paul and the Stories of Israel: Grand Thematic Narratives in Galatians (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2016).
(2016)
critically
evaluates six proposals for grand narratives behind Galatians: the covenant, the coming of nations to Zion, the (near) sacrifice of Isaac, the Spirit as the cloud in the wilderness, the exodus and the imperial cult. Das is not convinced by any of the proposals and suggests another grand narrative: the allusions to the servant passages in Isaiah. Barbara Whelan
5151 B. Whelan, “Paul to the Galatians: Reminder and Challenge”, Doctrine and Life 68:8 (2018), pp. 15–24.
(2018) identifies the following four main themes in the letter: Paul’s apostleship, justification by faith, faith vs. the law and Christian liberty.
5. Revelation and gospel/the “truth of the gospel”
Craig L. Blomberg
5252 C.L. Blomberg, “The New Testament Definition of Heresy (or When do Jesus and the Apostles Really Get Mad?)”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 45:1 (2002), pp. 59–72.
(2002) gives an overview of the way in which the New Testament defines and handles heresy. In the case of Galatians 1–2, Blomberg points out that Paul only vilified his opponents in such a harsh way when he believed people’s eternal destiny was endangered. In the light of 1:6–12, William J. Abraham
5353 W.J. Abraham, “The Offense of Divine Revelation”, Harvard Theological Review 95:3 (2002), pp. 251–264.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816002000160
(2002) investigates the notion of revelation. Abraham describes it as a threshold experience, opening a totally new world, and as something that can unite Jews and Gentiles in their service of God. On the basis of 5:2–6, Hung-Sik Choi
5454 H.-S. Choi, “‘The Truth of the Gospel’ in Galatians”, 한국기독교신학논총 29 (2003), pp. 71–94.
(2003) summarises Paul’s view of “the truth of the gospel” as follows: “[T]he truth of Paul’s gospel in Galatians is an announcement about God’s (past, present, and future) salvation (especially justification) of humanity (Jews and the Gentiles) not in and through the law, but in and through Christ and by pistis and the Spirit.”
5555 Op. cit., p. 83.Jens Schröter
5656 J. Schröter, “Die Einheit des Evangeliums: Erwägungen zur christologischen Kontroverse des Galaterbriefes und ihrem theologie-geschichtlichen Hintergrund”, in: J. Mrázek and J. Roskovec (eds.), Testimony & Interpretation: Early Christology in Its Judeo-Hellenistic Milieu: Studies in Honor of Petr Pokorný (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 272, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2004), pp. 49–67. Also available in: J. Schröter, Von Jesus zum Neuen Testament: Studien zur urchristlichen Theologiegeschichte und zur Entstehung des neutestamentlichen Kanons (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.204, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004), pp. 147–169. https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151493-7
(2004) focuses on the Christological controversy in Galatians. According to Paul, there is only one gospel, but it is expressed in two forms (“Gestalten”; 1:6–7, 2:7), and in this letter, Paul aims to show the original unity of the two forms. Paulus Toni Tantiono
5757 P.T. Tantiono, Speaking the Truth in Christ: An Exegetico-Theological Study of Galatians 4,12–20 and Ephesians 4,12–16 (Tesi Gregoriana: Serie Teologia 164, Rome: Editrice Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 2008).
(2008) investigates the theme “telling the truth in Christ” in 4:12–20 and in Ephesians 4:12–16. Tantiono points out that the best way to tell the truth is to tell it in the love coming from the Holy Spirit. Tantiono also notes that the notion of truth in Ephesians is wider than that in Galatians but that there are similarities in Christological and pneumatological aspects between the two letters. Assisi Saldanha
5858 A. Saldanha, “Letting the Cross Remain a Stumbling Block! An Analysis of Galatians 5:11”, Indian Theological Studies 48:2 (2011), pp. 123–148.
(2011) points out that Paul’s reference to the cross as a stumbling block in 5:11 depicts Christian identity in terms of an either-or and that he explicitly rejects circumcision as important for Christian identity. Saldanha also appropriates this notion for current believers. According to Heerak Christian Kim
5959 H.C. Kim, “Sola Scriptura and Galatians 1:8–9: Galatians’ Prejudice against Alternative Interpretation ”, in: H.C. Kim (ed.), Galatians as Examined by Diverse Academics in 2012 (St. Andrews, Scotland) (Hermit Kingdom Studies in Christianity and Judaism 3, Newark NJ: The Hermit Kingdom Press, 2013), pp. 164–209.
(2013), the concept sola Scriptura is not an invention of the Reformation. A similar notion was already operative in Early Christianity. Kim explains this further by means of a literary device in Galatians, a so-called “key signifier”. In a study of the background of Paul’s exclusive of use of the term ἐπαγγελία (“promise”) to denote God’s pledge, Kevin P. Conway
6060 K.P. Conway, The Promises of God: The Background of Paul’s Exclusive Use of “epangelia” for the Divine Pledge (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 211, Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014), pp. 196–206. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110376081
(2014) argues that “promise” and “gospel” are interrelated to such an extent that Paul uses the terms practically interchangeably. For Paul “gospel” is thus not restricted to the Christ event, but was already proclaimed to Abraham. Taking 5:12 as a point of departure, J. Cornelis de Vos
6161 J.C. de Vos, “‘I Wish Those Who Unsettle You Would Mutilate Themselves!’ (Gal 5:12): Circumcision and Emasculation in the Letter to the Galatians”, in: M. Popović, M. Schoonover and M. Vandenberghe (eds.), Jewish Cultural Encounters in the Ancient Mediterranean and Near Eastern World (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 178, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017), pp. 201–217.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004336919_014
(2017) notes that Paul opposes both Jewish and Anatolian cultural elements, thus creating a third option. Paul replaces symbols such as emasculation and circumcision by baptism: “He substitutes the tangible signs of affiliation, and therewith of a certain security, by a spiritual life that is oriented toward the eschaton. The certainty lies in hope”.
6262 Op. cit., p. 216.
Jamel Velji
6363 J. Velji, “Seeing Salvation: Authority and Apocalypse in Saint Paul and the Nizari Ismaili Qiyāma”, Studies in Religion 46:3 (2017), pp. 359–376.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0008429816687306
(2017) points out an apocalyptic deep structure underlying both Galatians and the Nizari Ismaili declaration on the qiyāma (or resurrection) of 1164. This deep structure is expressed in various apocalyptic aspects, for example, in a view on how divine revelation reorganised human history and temporality.
6. Theo-logy (God)
6.1 Studies based on the letter as a whole
Richard B. Hays
6464 R.B. Hays, “The God of Mercy Who Rescues Us from the Present Evil Age: Romans and Galatians”, in: A.A. Das and F.J. Matera (eds.), The Forgotten God: Perspectives in Biblical Theology: Essays in Honor of Paul J. Achtemeier
(2002) outlines the depiction of God in Galatians in terms of the narrative substructure of the letter. For Hays, the central notion in this letter is God as “a merciful paternal figure who embraces Gentiles and Jews together within his covenantal family”,
65
(Louisville KY: John Knox, 2002), pp. 123–143. on the Occasion of His Seventy-Fifth Birthday
i.e., the emphasis falls upon God as Father, rescuing people from the present evil age. According to Jerome H. Neyrey
6665 Op. cit., p. 126.
(2004), one finds “theologies in conflict” in Galatians and the most significant aspect of Paul’s view of God in this letter is the portrayal of God as Someone-in-relationships, i.e., as Patron and Benefactor (e.g., in his imparting of the Spirit), the appropriate response being faith, obedience and praise. According to Piotr Łabuda
6766 J.H. Neyrey, Render to God: New Testament Understandings of the Divine (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2004), pp. 191–211.
(2011), Paul’s portrayal of God corresponds to what is found in the Hebrew Scriptures. In Galatians and Romans, Paul depicts God as a tutor, caring for and disciplining his children, but, most importantly, Paul emphasises that God is the Father of all of the believers. In a thorough study of the depiction of God in Galatians, Christiane Zimmermann
6867 P. Łabuda, “Paweł Jako Ojciec i Bóg Jako ‘Abba, Ojciec’”, Verbum Vitae 20 (2011), pp. 171–190.
https://doi.org/10.31743/vv.2042
(2013) systematically works through the letter before highlighting the following aspects: God as sovereign Lord in actions towards and in people; God as justifying judge; fatherhood as God’s central quality; and communication as God’s central activity. Ross Wagner
6968 C. Zimmermann, Gott und seine Söhne: Das Gottesbild des Galaterbriefs (Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 135, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Theologie, 2013). See also the earlier broader study: C. Zimmermann, Die Namen des Vaters: Studien zu ausgewählten neutestamentlichen Gottesbezeichnungen vor ihrem frühjüdischen und paganen Sprachhorizont (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 69, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2007).
(2014) sets out to answer the question of whether Paul regarded God as the Father of the Jews only or also of the Gentiles. Wagner begins by investigating Paul’s depiction of God in Galatians, arguing that Paul remained particularistic in his portrayal of God. Jane Heath
7069 R. Wagner, “Is God the Father of Jews Only, or Also of Gentiles? The Peculiar Shape of Paul’s ‘Universalism’”, in: F. Albrecht and R. Feldmeier (eds.), The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity (Themes in Biblical Narrative 18, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 233–254. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004264779
(2014) discusses the relationship between God as Father and other parents in the New Testament. In the case of Galatians, the relationship between God as Father and Abraham as (spiritual) father is important. God’s fatherhood took shape in human history in his Son (the seed of Abraham) and in those who believed in his Son. Accordingly, the relationship to God through his Son became the focus of unity for humankind. D. Francois Tolmie
7170 J. Heath, “God the Father and Other Parents in the New Testament”, in: F. Albrecht and R. Feldmeier (eds.), The Divine Father: Religious and
(2018) offers an overview of tendencies in the way in which scholars approached the depiction of God in Galatians, with some suggestions as to aspects that still need attention.
6.2 Studies based on pericope/verses in the letter
John Suggit
72
(Themes in Biblical Narrative 18, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 233–254. Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004264779
(2003) argues that 1:3 indicates that Paul regarded God as the Father of Jesus and also as the Father of the believers because of their baptism and unity with Christ. Suzanne Nicholson
7371 D.F. Tolmie, “God in Galatians: Tendencies in the Study of an Important Theme”, Stellenbosch Theological Journal 4:2 (2018), pp. 265–281.
https://doi.org/10.17570/stj.2018.v4n2.a13
(2010) investigates Paul’s three strongest statements on monotheism: 3:20, 1 Corinthians 8:4–6 and Romans 3:30. Nicholson describes the relationship between Christ and God as “dynamic oneness”. In Galatians 3:20, Moses is depicted as an inferior mediator to Christ, the mediator of the new covenant, who participates in God’s deity. Annang Asumang
7472 J. Suggit, “The Fatherhood of God: Galatians 1:3”, Neotestamentica 37:1 (2003), pp. 97–103.
(2012) is of the opinion that, apart from soteriological issues, Paul’s opponents also had a problem with the idea of trinitarian worship. Asumang uses 4:6 and Philippians 3:3 as test cases to illustrate that this matter was also in dispute. Christopher R. Bruno
7573 S. Nicholson, Dynamic Oneness: The Significance and Flexibility of Paul’s One-God Language (Cambridge: The Lutterworth Press/James Clarke & Co, 2010), pp. 105–166.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1cgf4b5
(2013) traces the Jewish background of the phrase “God is one” (used in 3:20 and Romans 3:30). Bruno finds that in Jewish literature the phrase normally functioned as a boundary marker (Zechariah 14:9 is an exception) and that Paul uses it in a different way, as the basis for the unity of Jews and Gentiles, which might imply that Zechariah 14:9 may have served as the background of Paul’s reference to God in 3:20. Darren O. Sumner
7674 A. Asumang, “The Role of the Doctrine of Trinitarian Worship in Paul’s Dispute with the Judaizers: Galatians 4:6 and Philippians 3:3 as Test Cases”, Conspectus 14 (2012), pp. 1–55.
(2014) considers Karl Barth’s interpretation of 4:4, in particular from the perspective of classical trinitarianism and Barth’s critical thoughts on the matter as they bear upon the issue how human temporality relates to divine eternity. Marcus Aceituno Donoso
7775 C.R. Bruno, “God Is One”: The Function of eis ho theos as a Ground for Gentile Inclusion in Paul’s Letters (Library of New Testament Studies 497, London: Bloomsbury/T & T Clark, 2013), pp. 162–197.
(2014) investigates Paul’s views on the promises of God in 3:19–22 and 2 Corinthians 1:15–22, highlighting the centrality of God in Paul’s thought, in particular as it is revealed Christologically. Scott R. Swain
7876 D.O. Sumner, “Karl Barth and ‘The Fullness of Time’: Eternity and Divine Intent in the Epistle to the Galatians”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 249–257.
(2014) investigates 4:4–7 from the perspective of the doctrine of the Trinity and argues that this passage “implies a trinitarian theology insofar as it presents the twofold mission of the Son and the Spirit as an instance of God’s immediate, natural agency.”
7977 M. Aceituno Donoso, Las “Promesas de Dios” en San Pablo: Estudio Exegético-Teológico de Gál 3,19–22 y 2 Cor 1,15–22 (Tesi Gregoriana Serie Teologia 211, Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2014), pp. 84–128.
François Vouga
8078 S.R. Swain, “‘Heirs through God’: Galatians 4:4–7 and the Doctrine of the Trinity”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 258–268.
(2015) focuses on the paradox of the visible revelation of an invisible God. According to Vouga, the cross is a visible revelation of an invisible God and of the invisible identity of the human being – a thought that Vouga finds best expressed in 3:10–14.Atsuhiro Asano (2015) discusses the “motherliness” of God in two passages in Galatians: 3:28 and 4:19. In the case of 3:28, Asano
8179 Op. cit., p. 265.
links Paul’s reference to unity in Christ to God’s motherliness, as reflected in the creation story: “God’s creation of humankind in its wholeness of male and female reflects the image of the Creator… In establishing his community and presenting the new salvation history, for example in Paul’s ecclesiology and soteriology, a more holistic view of God is reflected.”
8280 F. Vouga, “La promesse de l’invisibilité: Le paradoxe de la révélation visible du Dieu invisible”, Etudes Theologiques et Religieuses 90:2 (2015), pp. 165–179.
https://doi.org/10.3917/etr.0902.0165
In the case of 4:19, Asano
8381 A. Asano, “Motherliness of God: A Search for Maternal Aspects in Paul’s Theology”, in: G.L. Green, S.T. Pardue and K. K. Yeo (eds.), The Trinity among the Nations: The Doctrine of God in the Majority World (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2015), pp. 127–131. Also available in: A. Asano, “Motherliness of God: A Search for Maternal Aspects in Paul’s Theology”, in: G.L. Green, S.T. Pardue and K. K. Yeo (eds.), Majority World Theology: Christian Doctrine in Global Context (Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity Press, 2020), pp. 87–89.
summarises the portrayal of God as “the writhing God”. In this verse, Paul depicts himself as imitating God’s motherly anguish about Israel’s unfaithfulness. In this way, the notion is conveyed that God cares for his people just as a mother cares for her children. Keith L. Johnson
8482 Op. cit., (2015), p. 130.
(2017) criticises Katherine Sonderegger’s decision to view Scripture through God’s revelation to Moses at the burning bush. According to Johnson, this goes against Paul’s approach, who read Scripture through the lens of the church and its head, Christ. One of the passages that Johnson selects to illustrate Paul’s approach is 3:19–20.
7. Christology
7.1 Studies based on the letter as a whole
Antje and Michael Labahn
8583 A. Asano, “Motherliness of God: A Search for Maternal Aspects in Paul’s Theology”, in: G.L. Green, S.T. Pardue and K. K. Yeo (eds.), The Trinity among the Nations: The Doctrine of God in the Majority World (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2015), pp. 131–133. Also available in: A. Asano, “Motherliness of God: A Search for Maternal Aspects in Paul’s Theology”, in: G.L. Green, S.T. Pardue and K. K. Yeo (eds.), Majority World Theology: Christian Doctrine in Global Context (Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity Press, 2020), pp. 89–91.
(2000) argue that for Paul the insight that Jesus is the Son of God is the crucial aspect in his proclamation of the gospel. The title focuses on soteriology and eschatology, indicating both the claim and the enabling reason for a human way of living in accordance with God’s loving turn to humankind through his Son. Douglas A. Campbell
8684 K.L. Johnson, “Compatibilism and Continuity in Katherine Sonderegger’s Systematic Theology”, International Journal of Systematic Theology 19:2 (2017), pp. 175–187.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijst.12176
(2002) investigates the story of Jesus in Romans and Galatians. In Romans, Campbell identifies two trajectories, namely descent and ascent. Campbell finds the same story in Galatians, although there are some differences, for example more emphasis on the cross of Christ, the deliverance from the curse and the identification of Jesus as the seed of Abraham. Lisa Wang
8785 A. Labahn and M. Labahn, “Jesus als Sohn Gottes bei Paulus: Eine soteriologische Grundkonstante der paulinischen Christologie”, in: U. Schnelle, T. Söding and M. Labahn (eds.), Paulinische Christologie: Exegetische Beiträge: Hans Hübner zum 70. Geburtstag (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000), pp. 97–120.
(2003) disagrees with John G. Gager’s
8886 D.A. Campbell, “The Story of Jesus in Romans and Galatians”, in: B.W. Longenecker (ed.), Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2002), pp. 97–124. Updated version: D.A. Campbell, The Quest for Paul’s Gospel: A Suggested Strategy (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 274, London/New York NY: T & T Clark International, 2005), pp. 69–
statement that Paul did not think that Jews would be saved by Christ. In order to prove this, Wang offers an interpretation of Galatians and Romans emphasising Jesus’ role as the Jewish Messiah and Paul as affirming both the Jewish nation and the law. Jerome Murphy-O’Connor
89
94. For responses, see G.N. Stanton, “‘I Think, When I Read That Sweet Story of Old’: A Response to Douglas Campbell”, in: B.W. Longenecker (ed.), Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2002), pp. 125–132, and R.B. Hays, “Is Paul’s Gospel Narratable?”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 27:2 (2004), pp. 217–239.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567661289
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0402700205
(2003) draws attention to the differences between the Christology of the Thessalonian correspondence and of Galatians (emphasis on the modality of the death of Christ and on the corporate Christ), and links this development to the crisis in Galatia. Jens Schröter
9087 L. Wang, “Jesus as Messiah in Galatians and Romans: A Response to John Gager’s Reinventing Paul”, Toronto Journal of Theology 19:2 (2003), pp. 173–182.
https://doi.org/10.3138/tjt.19.2.173
(2004) focuses on the Christological controversy in Galatians. According to Paul, there is only one gospel, but it is expressed in two forms (“Gestalten”), and in this letter Paul aims to show the original unity of the two forms. In an analysis of the Christology of Galatians, Gordon D. Fee
9188 J.G. Gager, Reinventing Paul (Oxford/New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2000).
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195150858.001. 0001
(2007) approaches the issue from two perspectives: Jesus as the Christ, God’s Messianic Son (pre-existent and incarnate) and Jesus as Christ with divine prerogatives (such as being the agent of Paul’s apostleship and the one who reveals). Arguing against a consensus in Pauline scholarship, Joel Willitts
9289 J. Murphy-O’Connor, “The Origins of Paul’s Christology: From Thessalonians to Galatians”, in: K.J. O’Mahony (ed.), Christian Origins: Worship, Belief and Society: The Milltown Institute and the Irish Biblical Association Millennium Conference (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 241, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003), pp. 113–142. Also available in: J. Murphy-O’Connor, Keys to Galatians: Collected Essays (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2012), pp. 143–173.
(2012) makes a case for finding indications of a Davidic messiahship in Galatians. N.T. Wright
9390 J. Schröter, “Die Einheit des Evangeliums: Erwägungen zur christologischen Kontroverse des Galaterbriefes und ihrem theologie-geschichtlichen Hintergrund”, in: J. Mrázek and J. Roskovec (eds.), Testimony & Interpretation: Early Christology in Its Judeo-Hellenistic Milieu: Studies in Honor of Petr Pokorný (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 272, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2004), pp. 49–67. Also available in: J. Schröter, Von Jesus zum Neuen Testament: Studien zur urchristlichen Theologiegeschichte und zur Entstehung des neutestamentlichen Kanons (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.204, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), pp. 147–169.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151493-7
(2014) is of the opinion that Paul’s view of Christ’s messiahship in Galatians combined the notions of justification and participation. Christ is depicted as the Messiah of Israel representing his people. Accordingly, one may speak of an incorporative ecclesiology in the letter, since its ecclesiology is linked to Paul’s notion of messiahship.
7.2 Studies based on pericopes/verses in the letter
David G. Horell
9491 G.D. Fee, Pauline Christology: An Exegetical-Theological Study (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2007), pp. 207–236.
(2000) points out that the conviction expressed in 3:28 that distinctions such as those between Jews and Gentiles are not important in the construction of the Christian community is based on Paul’s corporate Christology. This corporate Christology is the basis of a controversial notion of community between Jews and Gentiles. Klaus Scholtissek
9592 J. Willitts, “Davidic Messiahship in Galatians: Clearing the Deck for a Study of the Theme in Galatians”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 2:2 (2012), pp. 143–161.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26426553
For a response, see M.V. Novenson, “The Messiah ben Abraham in Galatians: A Response to Joel Willitts”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 2:2 (2012), pp. 163–169.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26426554
(2000) highlights the relationship between the earthly Jesus and Paul’s gospel. Taking 4:4 as a point of departure, Scholtissek argues that Paul did not lose sight of the earthly Jesus but presented him from a post-resurrection perspective. Robert A. Bryant
9693 N.T. Wright, “Messiahship in Galatians”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 3–23.
(2001) emphasises the importance of 1:1–10 for understanding Paul’s letter and identifies three important “cords” in this section (the risen Christ, the crucified Christ and the God who calls people into the grace of Christ), which are then traced in the rest of the letter. Teresa Wong
9794 D.G. Horrell, “‘No Longer Jew or Greek’: Paul’s Corporate Christology and the Construction of Christian Community”, in: D.G. Horrell and C.M. Tuckett (eds.), Christology, Controversy and Community: New Testament Essays in Honour of David R. Catchpole (Novum Testamentum Supplements 99, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2000), pp. 321–344.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047400417_017
(2007) describes Paul’s Christology reflected in 4:4 (and in Romans 8:3) as “a Christology of the cross”. The cross is depicted as the climax of Paul’s Christology, the most important event in Christ’s life where God revealed himself as Father, in love and power. According to Susan R. Garrett
9895 K. Scholtissek, “‘Geboren aus einer Frau, geboren unter das Gesetz’ (Gal 4,4): Die christologisch-soteriologische Bedeutung des irdischen Jesus bei Paulus”, in: U. Schnelle, T. Söding and M. Labahn (eds.), Paulinische
(2008), 4:14 is not a mere hypothetical or metaphorical assertion. In this verse, Paul refers to Christ as God’s chief angel. Bart Ehrman
99
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000), pp. 194–219. Christologie: Exegetische Beiträge: Hans Hübner zum 70. Geburtstag
(2014) agrees with Garrett. For Paul, Christ was an angel. In the light of ancient Jewish traditions, Roji T. George
10096 R.A. Bryant, The Risen Crucified Christ in Galatians (Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 185, Atlanta GA: SBL, 2001).
(2008) focuses on the incarnate Christ in Paul’s epistles (as in 4:4) and links Paul’s idea of the incarnation of Christ to the Hebrew Bible, Second Temple Judaism and the Jesus tradition, rather than to Hellenism.César Izquierdo
10197 T. Wong, “‘God Sent Forth His Own Son’: A Study of Paul’s Christology of the Cross in Galatians 4:4 and Romans 8:3”, Sino-Christian Studies 4 (2007), pp. 167–189.
(2008) analyses the six texts in the New Testament where the term “mediator” occurs. In the case of 3:19, Izquierdo contends that, although the term does not refer to Christ, it does not exclude the sense of 1 Timothy 2:5, where Christ is depicted as a mediator in the full sense of the word. Joshua W. Jipp
10298 S.R. Garrett, No Ordinary Angel: Celestial Spirits and Christian Claims About Jesus (Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library, Binghamton NY: Vail-Ballou, 2008), p. 175.
(2015) argues that Paul creatively adapted the notion of Mediterranean kingship in his Christology. In Galatians, this can be seen in the way in which Jesus’ teaching and legislation is depicted in 5:13–6:10, in particular in the demand to love one’s neighbour. Eusebio González
10399 B. Ehrman, How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee (New York NY: HarperOne, 2014), pp. 252–253. Ehrman also refers to Charles A. Gieschen, but Gieschen points out that Ehrman misquoted him. See C.A. Gieschen, “Misquoting Gieschen”, Concordia Theological Quarterly 82:1/2 (2018), pp. 139–141.
(2017) investigates the six texts in the New Testament where the term “mediator” occurs and identifies the following characteristics associated with the term “mediator”: uniqueness (of Christ as mediator), universality (Christ being the mediator of all people) and humanity and efficacy (Christ guaranteeing the possibility of a faithful response to God). In the light of ancient Jewish traditions, Kim Paul Sang Woo
104100 R.T. George, “‘God Sent His Son, Born of a Woman’ (Gal 4:4): The Idea of Incarnation, Its Antecedents, and Significance in Paul’s Theology”, Doon Theological Journal 51:1 (2008), pp. 65–85.
(2018) highlights a Christological trajectory in 4:21–31: vv. 28–31 implicitly offer a typology between Isaac and Christ, and this trajectory is meant to re-establish the relationship of the recipients with the Risen Christ. On the basis of 4:4, Waldecir Gonzaga
105101 C. Izquierdo, “Cristo ‘Mediador’: Perspectiva Bíblica”, Scripta Theologica 40:3 (2008), pp. 695–732.
(2019) argues that although Paul was aware of Mary’s virginial conception, he did not focus on it but rather on identifying Jesus with humanity and thus as sharing human fragility and vulnerability. T. Jude Nirmal Doss
106102 J.W. Jipp, Christ Is King: Paul’s Royal Ideology (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2015). See also: J.W. Jipp, The Messianic Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2020).
(2019) notes that scholars differ in describing Paul’s Christology and suggests that this is due to the fact that Paul’s Christology was experiential rather than systematic. Nirmal Doss then adds another option on the basis of 4:19: a transformative Christology in which the notion of Christ being formed in believers plays a central role. Daniela del Gaudio
107103 E. González, “Cristo Como Mediador (μεσίτης) en el NT”, Scripta Theologica 49:2 (2017), pp. 279–299.
https://doi.org/10.15581/006.49.2.279-299
(2020) views 4:4–5 from the perspective of Mariology. As the oldest text in the New Testament reflecting the mystery of Mary, this may be regarded as the beginning of Mariology. As a virgin, her motherhood shows that the salvation brought by Christ touches humanity from the inside.
8. Pneumatology
8.1 Studies based on the letter as a whole
According to Peter Dschulnigg
108104 P.K. Sang Woo, Deux alliances: Sara et Agar: Trajectoire christologique en Ga 4,21–31 à la lumière des traditions juives anciennes (Séoul: Goodnews Publishing House, 2018).
(2001), if the length of Galatians is taken into consideration, it contains more references to the Spirit than any other Pauline letter. Dschulnigg offers a detailed discussion of all 18 occurrences of the term in the letter, in terms of four categories: 3:2, 3 and 5: the Spirit as the dimension of experiencing justification by faith; 3:14, 4:6, 29 and 5:5: further theological development of the notion of the Spirit in the light of the cross, promise, childhood of God and justification; 5:16–18, 22 and 25: the Spirit as the moving force behind ethical behaviour; and 6:1 and 18: the term “spirit” used in an anthropological sense. John R. Meyer
109105 W. Gonzaga, “‘Nascido de Mulher’ (Gl 4,4)”, Horizonte 17:53 (2019), pp. 1194–1216.
https://doi.org/10.5752/P.2175-5841.2019v17n53p1194
(2001) points out that if believers walk according to the Spirit, they participate in the existence of the risen Christ. This presupposes that they participate in the life of the dying Christ existentially and sacramentally. Meyer also notes that Christ’s continual dying has implications for the suffering that believers may still experience. José E. Aguilar Chiu
110106 T.J. Nirmal Doss, “Until Christ Is Formed in You (Gal 4:19): An Exploration of Transformative Christology”, Indian Theological Studies 56:1 (2019), pp. 31–47.
(2007) draws attention to the close relationship between the Spirit and justification in Paul’s thought. This relationship may be described as reciprocal, since justification implies vivification through the Spirit and vivification implies justification. Theo Witkamp
111107 D. del Gaudio, “La Cristologia di Gal 4,4 e la Concretezza Storica Dell’incarnazione del Verbo in Prospettiva Redentiva”, Miscellanea Francescana 120:3/4 (2020), pp. 311–335.
(2008) highlights the importance of experiencing the Spirit in Galatians. For Paul, the experience of the Spirit – the eschatological gift of God that is strongly linked to the Son of God – is the basic experience of God’s presence. In a study of the Spirit in Galatians, Gordon D. Fee
112108 P. Dschulnigg, “Überlegungen zu Bedeutung und Funktion der Geistaussagen im Galaterbrief”, in: J. Eckert, M. Schmidl and H. Steichele (eds.), Pneuma und Gemeinde: Christsein in der Tradition des Paulus und Johannes: Festschrift für Josef Hainz zum 65. Geburtstag (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 2001), pp. 15–32. Also available in: P. Dschulnigg, “Überlegungen zu Bedeutung und Funktion der Geistaussagen im Galaterbrief”, in: B. Kowalski, R. Höffner and J. Verheyden (eds.), Studien zu Einleitungsfragen und zur Theologie des Neuen Testaments: Gesammelte Aufsätze von Peter Dschulnigg (Biblical Tools and Studies 9, Leuven/Paris/Walpole MA: Peeters, 2010), pp. 355–370.
(2009) emphasises the following four points: a person cannot become a believer without the Spirit, the Spirit’s primary role is linked to the ongoing life of the believing community, it is the main eschatological reality, and it is depicted as God’s personal presence. Rodrigo J. Morales
113109 J.R. Meyer, “Sharing in Christ’s Death and the Holy Spirit”, Irish Theological Quarterly 66:2 (2001), pp. 125–140.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002114000106600204
(2010) discusses the importance of the themes of the new exodus, new creation and the restoration of Israel in Galatians. According to Morales, Paul regarded the gift of the Spirit as a fulfilment of God’s promise to restore Israel. Furthermore, Paul followed Deutero-Isaiah by linking the Spirit to the blessing of Abraham and the inclusion of the Gentiles. According to David S. Harvey
114110 J.E. Aguilar Chiu, “Justification and the Spirit in Paul: Is There a Relationship?”, in: J.E. Aguilar Chiu, F. Manzi, F. Urso and Z. Estrada (eds.), “Il Verbo di Dio è vivo”: Studi sul Nuovo Testamento in Onore del Cardinale Albert Vanhoye, S.I. (Analecta Biblica 165, Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2007), pp. 357–377.
(2012), Paul aligns his own biography with the “upside-down honour” demonstrated in Christ’s death. This code of honour is also enacted in the community by the Spirit. James D.G. Dunn
115111 T. Witkamp, “De Ervaring van de Geest in Paulus’ Brief aan de Galaten”, Kerk & Theologie 59:2 (2008), pp. 100–115.
(2014) discusses all the references to the Spirit in Galatians, passage by passage, situating them within the development of Paul’s argument in the letter.In a study of Paul’s charismatic imperative, Robby J. Kagarise
116112 G.D. Fee, God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2009), pp. 369–469.
(2014) discusses several references to the Spirit in Galatians. The view of the Spirit in 3:1–5 is summarised as “the miraculous Spirit”, the emphasis being on the fact that through faith, human agency may function within the horizon of the Holy Spirit. Paul’s description of the Spirit in 4:6 is summarised as “the ecstatic Spirit”. In the case of 5:5, Kagarise believes that Paul also has the charismatic aspect of the Spirit’s work in mind. This means that Paul’s reference to faith in this verse should not be restricted to a different self-perception. It also refers to believers embracing and participating in the power of the Spirit. In the case of 5:13–6:10, Kagarise argues that Paul still thinks of the Spirit as a charismatic power and that this influences the way in which he portrays the agency of the Spirit and of believers in this pericope. Lois Malcolm
117113 R.J. Morales, The Spirit and the Restoration of Israel: New Exodus and New Creation Motifs in Galatians (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.282, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151625-2
(2014) focuses on the Spirit’s own “grammar” as it is found in Paul’s letters. According to Malcolm, Galatians offers us a grammar of faith, 1 Corinthians a grammar of love and 2 Corinthians a grammar of hope. Eduardo de la Serna
118114 D.S. Harvey, “‘Upside-Down Honour’ and the Spirit of the Faithful Son in Galatians”, Journal of the European Pentecostal Theological Association 32:1 (2012), pp. 61–74.
https://doi.org/10.1179/jep.2012.32.1.006
(2016) draws attention to the ecclesial and eschatological connotations of the Spirit in 1 Corinthians, Galatians and Romans. In the case of Galatians, De la Serna notes the fact that the Spirit is contrasted with weakness. It strengthens the community against the elements that are hostile to it (“the flesh”). Judith Stack
119115 J.D.G. Dunn, “Pneuma in Galatians”, in: T.J. Burke and K. Warrington (eds.), A Biblical Theology of the Holy Spirit (London: SPCK, 2014), pp. 373–396.
(2018) emphasises the role of the Spirit in justification. According to Galatians, the Spirit brings about justification, since it produces the fruit whereby one will be declared righteous. Furthermore, the Spirit is received through faith and not through the works of the law. On the basis of Pauline pneumatology (as reflected amongst others in Galatians), Wei Hua
120116 R.J. Kagarise, Paul’s Charismatic Imperatives (Journal of Pentecostal Theology Supplement Series 43, Dorset: Deo Publishing, 2014), pp. 120–145.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004397194
(2020) argues that the Spirit can transform a culture receiving the Christian gospel. It is thus possible that Chinese commemorating rites can be renewed and practised by Chinese Christians as a type of humanising etiquette.
8.2 Studies based on pericopes or verses in the letter
Rodrigo J. Morales
121117 L. Malcolm, “The Generative Grammar of the Holy Spirit”, Lutheran Quarterly 28:4 (2014), pp. 423–444.
(2009) believes that Paul’s reference to the Spirit in 3:14 is based on a Jewish tradition found in Deutero-Isaiah, the Words of the Luminaries (from Qumran) and the Testament of Judah, according to which the Spirit and divine blessing are depicted as an indication of the end-time redemption of Israel. On the basis of 3:1–5, Stephen Kerry
122118 E. de la Serna, “La Presencia del Espíritu en los Escritos de San Pablo”, Revista Bíblica 77 (2016), pp. 157–180.
https://doi.org/10.47182/rb.77.n-201652
(2010) claims that Paul regarded the Spirit as the sine qua non of the identity of the believer. This pericope depicts the role of the Spirit “in a believer’s life as the conterminous and confirmatory sign of true conversion”.
123119 J. Stack, “The Spirit and Justification: Experience, ‘Childship’ (υἱοθεσία), Participation, and Faith in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 44–52.
Paul Hartog
124120 W. Hua, “Pauline Pneumatology and the Chinese Rites: Spirit and Culture in the Holy See’s Missionary Strategy”, in: G.L. Green, S.T. Pardue and K.K. Yeo (eds.), Majority World Theology: Christian Doctrine in Global Context (Downers Grove IL: Intervarsity Press, 2020), pp. 280–294.
(2011) draws attention to the integrative role of the Spirit in the ethics of Galatians: “The work of the Holy Spirit unites justification and sanctification. Faith in Christ brings not only ‘freedom’ but also the dynamic ministry of the Spirit, who internally motivates and radically empowers a grace-initiated and community-oriented ethic of loving service.”
125121 R.J. Morales, “The Words of the Luminaries, the Curse of the Law, and the Outpouring of the Spirit in Gal 3,10–14”, Zeitschrift für die According to Seung Moo Lee
126
100:2 (2009), pp. 269–277. neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche
https://doi.org/10.1515/ZNTW.2009.0014
(2012), in 3:1–14, Paul stresses the Galatians’ experiences of the Spirit and the promise of the Spirit in order to resolve the conflict in the congregations and to let them return to his gospel. In another contribution, Lee
127122 S. Kerry, “An Exegetical Analysis of Galatians 3:1–5, with Particular Reference to Pneumatological Themes That Relate to the Onset and Continuation of Christian Identity, with Respect to Law and Gospel”, Journal of Biblical and Pneumatological Research 2 (2010), pp. 57–86.
(2020) argues that Paul encourages the Galatians in 3:14 to internalise the promises of the Spirit rather than the message proclaimed by his opponents. Chee-Chiew Lee
128123 Op. cit., p. 86.
(2013) disagrees with scholars who interpret the blessing to Abraham (mentioned in 3:14) as the Spirit. According to Lee, it refers to justification, and the reception of the Spirit is the proof that one has received justification. Jeremy W. Barrier
129124 P. Hartog, “The Integrative Role of the Spirit in the Ethics of Galatians”, Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 16 (2011), pp. 19–39.
(2014) explains that the interpretative leap that Paul makes in 3:14–16 when he links the promised “seed” of Abraham to the Galatians’ experience of the Spirit makes sense if one realises that Paul uses a physiological medical metaphor based on contemporary notions of how the “spirit” functions in the human body. On the basis of 4:6 (and Romans 8:9), John R. Coulson
130125 Op. cit., p. 39.
(2017) believes that Paul was aware of the tradition that Jesus was anointed by the Spirit as God’s Son and that he was raised through the Spirit. However, Paul did not focus on these issues but rather on the Father and the Risen Lord as the source of the Spirit with Jesus being a pattern for how believers experience the Spirit. Scott A. Swanson
131126 S.M. Lee, “‘Experiences in Receiving the Spirit’ of the Galatian Community and the Object of ‘The Promise of the Spirit’”, 신약논단 19:4 (2012), pp. 1173–1207.
(2018) is of the opinion that Psalm 143:10 lies behind Paul’s exhortations to walk by the Spirit and be led by the Spirit (5:16, 18 and Romans 8:14). This presupposes a wisdom framework that one has to take seriously in order to understand this facet of Paul’s instruction on the Spirit properly. Nélida Naveros Córdovo
132127 S.M. Lee, “The Promise of the Spirit (Galatians 3:14) and the Internalization of the Galatian Christian Community”, 대학과 선교 43 (2020), pp. 35–61.
(2020) thinks that Paul’s view of the Spirit was primarily influenced by the LXX and a development in his view of the role of the Spirit in ethics may be detected. In his early letters, the Spirit was depicted as preeminent, but in his later letters it became the font of all the virtues. In Galatians, he also challenged fundamental Jewish ideas, for example by opposing the Spirit and the law and by associating the Spirit with virtues and flesh with vices.
9. Cosmology
According to Edward Adams
133128 C.-C. Lee, The Blessing of Abraham, the Spirit, and Justification in Galatians: Their Relationship and Significance for Understanding Paul’s Theology (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2013).
(2000), the term “world” in Galatians is used primarily in a negative sense, although not to the same extent as in the case of 1 Corinthians. Adams points out the following two differences between Galatians and 1 Corinthians: In 1 Corinthians, “world” is the dominant negative term, but in Galatians, “flesh” plays this role, and in 1 Corinthians, the boundary between the Christian community and the Graeco-Roman world is stressed, whereas Galatians emphasises the boundary between the Christians and the Jews. In a contribution on Paul’s views on principalities and powers, Chris Forbes
134129 J.W. Barrier, “Jesus’ Breath: A Physiological Analysis of πνεῦμα within Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 37:2 (2014), pp. 115–138.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X14554364
(2001) investigates Paul’s reference to “the elements of the world” in 4:3 and 9. According to Forbes, Paul probably regarded the elements as personifiable spiritual forces that some people wrongly treated as gods. In a study of the cosmology of Romans, the Corinthian letters and Galatians, Joel White
135130 J.R. Coulson, “Jesus and the Spirit in Paul’s Theology: The Earthly Jesus”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 79:1 (2017), pp. 77–96.
https://doi.org/10.1353/cbq.2017.0004
(2008) summarises Paul’s cosmology in terms of nine statements, broadly moving from the idea of God as creator of a hierarchically structured universe (God – humanity – world), to the disruption brought about by sin, and finally to the restoration of the world, an event that was initiated by the resurrection of Christ and that will be completed when he returns. Martinus C. de Boer
136131 S.A. Swanson, “The Instruction of the Spirit: The Wisdom Framework for Pauline Spirit Dependence”, Mid-America Journal of Theology 29 (2018), pp. 81–128.
(2013) investigates the reference of the term “cosmos” in 4:3 and 6:14. In 4:3, it refers to the physical world and in 6:14, to religion based on the law. These two uses of the term are linked in the sense that the end of religion based on the law (6:14) is also the end of the “elements of the world” (4:3). One of the issues that Michael Wolter
137132 N.N. Córdova, To Live in the Spirit: Paul and the Spirit of God (Lanham MD: Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2020).
(2013) discusses in a study of God and the world in the Pauline letters is how cosmology and ecclesiology are interrelated. One of the passages that Wolter uses to illustrate this notion is 6:14–15. In this instance, Paul draws a boundary between those who believe in Christ and those who belong to the world. In a study of principalities and powers in Paul’s letter, Robert Ewusie Moses
138133 E. Adams, Constructing the World: A Study in Paul’s Cosmological Language (Studies of the New Testament and Its World, Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2000), pp. 221–231.
(2014) discusses “the elements of the world” (4:3 and 9). Moses is of the opinion that the expression refers to both the four basic elements that people thought the world consisted of and the demonic powers that the Galatians were enslaved by before they became believers. Kyu Seop Kim
139134 C. Forbes, “Paul’s Principalities and Powers: Demythologizing Apocalyptic?”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 23:82 (2001), pp. 61–88.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0102308203
See also the follow-up article in which Forbes argues that Paul’s views on principalities and powers are best understood as a combination of insights from his Jewish heritage and a Graeco-Roman world view: C. Forbes, “Pauline Demonology and/or Cosmology? Principalities, Powers and the Elements of the World in Their Hellenistic Context”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 24:3 (2002), pp. 51–73.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0202400303
(2016) thinks that Paul uses the term “the elements of the world” in 4:3 and 9 in terms of a cosmic dualism to refer to physical perishable elements in the world in the old era that still have to be transformed by the Spirit. In a study of Paul’s views on apocalypse as holy war, Emma Wasserman
140135 J. White, “Paul’s Cosmology: The Witness of Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, and Galatians”, in: J.T. Pennington and S.M. McDonough (eds.), Cosmology and New Testament Theology (Library of New Testament Studies 355, London: T & T Clark, 2008), pp. 90–106.
(2018) has a chapter on Paul’s perception of other gods. In the case of Galatians, Wasserman highlights 4:1–10 and interprets “the elements of the world” in v. 3 as the lesser parts of the world, in particular heavenly bodies, a notion that is then linked to gentile gods in v. 9.
10. Anthropology and ethnicity
10.1 Anthropology
In an investigation of Paul’s view of sin, T.L. Carter
141136 M.C. de Boer, “Cross and Cosmos in Galatians”, in: D.J. Downs and M.L. Skinner (eds.), The Unrelenting God: God’s Action in Scripture: Essays in Honor of Beverly Roberts Gaventa (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2013), pp. 207–225.
(2001) adapts Mary Douglas’s model (the “grid and group matrix”) in order to examine the social dynamics underlying Paul’s views of sin in 1 Corinthians, Galatians and Romans. Carter situates Galatians in the “high group/low grid quadrant” of Douglas’s matrix. This means that group identity was strong, and the symbolic system of society was rejected (sin was an external threat). In such groups, accusations of witchcraft were also common as happens in Galatians. Peter Dschulnigg
142137 M. Wolter, “God and the World in the Epistles of Paul”, In die Skriflig 47:2 (2013), pp. 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ids.v47i2.700
(2001) offers a detailed discussion of all 18 instances of the term “spirit” in Galatians. In the case of 6:1 and 18, Dschulnigg focuses on Paul’s use of the term in an anthropological sense. On the basis of Romans 8, Galatians 3:26–27, 4:4–7 and Ephesians 1:4–5, Antonio Aranda
143138 R.E. Moses, Practices of Power: Revisiting the Principalities and the Powers in the Pauline Letters (Emerging Scholars, Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press, 2014), pp. 119–156.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt22nm7p1
(2006) summarises Paul’s view of the divine image in humankind as follows: Christ is God’s image and when humans are conformed to Christ’s image, they become God’s image in Christ. Lidija Gunjević
144139 K.S. Kim, “Reconstructing Paul’s Physics – Paul’s Cosmic Dualism and τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου”, 신약연구 15:3 (2016), pp. 524–563.
(2007) discusses the way in which the opposites “body” and “spirit” in Galatians are interpreted by Augustine, Aquinas, Luther and some modern interpreters. Augustine, Aquinas and Luther understood “body” as an anthropological description whereas modern interpreters tend to interpret it as an eschatological category. On the basis of the distribution of the vocabulary of justification in Romans and Galatians, Frederico Pastor Ramos
145140 E. Wasserman, Apocalypse as Holy War: Divine Politics and Polemics in the Letters of Paul (Anchor Bible Reference Library, New Haven CT/London: Yale University Press, 2018), pp. 151–155.
https://doi.org/10.12987/9780300235630
(2007) challenges the notion that this doctrine forms the centre of Pauline anthropology. Although it is an important Pauline theme, it does not represent the centre of his view of humankind. Hermut Löhr
146141 T.L. Carter, Paul and the Power of Sin: Redefining “Beyond the Pale” (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 115, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 78–123.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511487880
(2007) discusses Paul’s notion of the human will, as expressed in 5:13–6:10 and Romans 6:1–8:17. Löhr argues that Paul developed a notion of the relative freedom of the human will, which was situated within a broader theological framework focusing on God’s actions. Troels Engberg-Pedersen
147142 P. Dschulnigg, “Überlegungen zu Bedeutung und Funktion der Geistaussagen im Galaterbrief”, in: J. Eckert, M. Schmidl and H. Steichele (eds.), Pneuma und Gemeinde: Christsein in der Tradition des Paulus und Johannes: Festschrift für Josef Hainz zum 65. Geburtstag (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 2001), pp. 15–32. Also available in: P. Dschulnigg, “Überlegungen zu Bedeutung und Funktion der Geistaussagen im Galaterbrief”, in: B. Kowalski, R. Höffner and J. Verheyden (eds.), Studien zu Einleitungsfragen und zur Theologie des Neuen Testaments: Gesammelte
(2010) is of the opinion that Paul viewed the human spirit as a material substance. This corresponded to the way in which Stoics thought of the human spirit. Paul thus did not regard the spirit as something immaterialistic as was typical of dualistic Platonism. In another contribution, Engberg-Pedersen
148
(Biblical Tools and Studies 9, Leuven/Paris/Walpole MA: Peeters, 2010), pp. 355–370. Aufsätze von Peter Dschulnigg
(2011) finds a Stoically-informed idea of personhood in Paul, both for believers and non-believers: “In Paul, a human ‘person’ is a being who is self-reflectively capable of turning one’s own gaze on one’s own body in order to change it. In the unredeemed ‘person’ the gaze will not always be successful. In the redeemed ‘person,’ by contrast, it is able genuinely to transform the body.”
149143 A. Aranda, “Imagen de Dios en Cristo – Hijos de Dios en Cristo: Una Relectura de la Doctrina Antropológica Paulina”, Scripta Theologica 38:2 (2006), pp. 599–615.
In another contribution, Engberg-Pedersen
150144 L. Gunjević, “Suprotnost Tijelo/Duh u Poslanici Galaćanima”, Služba Božja 47:4 (2007), pp. 357–380.
(2013) discusses the movement from sin to virtue in 5:13–26 from two perspectives: the characteristics of sin, and how Paul views the movement from sin to virtue (“the fruit of the Spirit”). In this discussion, Engberg-Pedersen points out similarities between Paul’s views and Stoic and Aristotelian views.In a discussion of the “I” referred to in Romans 7, Jean-Noël Aletti
151145 F. Pastor Ramos, “¿Es la Justificación el Centro de la Antropología Soteriológica de Pablo?”, in: J.E. Aguilar Chiu, F. Manzi, F. Urso and Z. Estrada (eds.), “Il Verbo di Dio è Vivo”: Studi sul Nuovo Testamento in Onore del Cardinale Albert Vanhoye, S.I. (Analecta Biblica 165, Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2007), pp. 379–385.
(2012) argues against scholars interpreting it as referring to believers. Aletti also contends that it is wrong to use Galatians 5:17 to support such an interpretation. One of the issues that Günter Röhser
152146 H. Löhr, “Paulus und der Wille zur Tat: Beobachtungen zu einer frühchristlichen Theologie als Anweisung zur Lebenskunst”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 98:2 (2007), pp. 165–188.
https://doi.org/10.1515/ZNTW.2007.012
(2012) investigates in a study of Paul’s view on the power of sin is the term “sinner”, used in 2:17. In this instance, Röhser stresses that Paul does not regard the term “sinner” as an adequate self-description of believers. For Guillermo Hansen
153147 T. Engberg-Pedersen, Cosmology and Self in the Apostle Paul: The Material Spirit (Oxford/New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2010).
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199558568.001.0001
(2013), Luther’s interpretation of Galatians opens a window to a new understanding of what it means to be human. Faith displaces a socially and ecclesiastically constructed self-consciousness so that a Christ-consciousness can emerge. Jean Berchmans Paluku Mukwemulere
154148 T. Engberg-Pedersen, “A Stoic Concept of the Person in Paul? From Galatians 5:17 to Romans 7:14–25”, in: C.K. Rothschild and T.W. Thompson (eds.), Christian Body, Christian Self: Concepts of Early Christian Personhood (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.284, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), pp. 85–112.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151861-4
(2014) links the anthropology of Galatians to the dynamic articulation of promise, law and childhood of God in the letter, with Christ’s death on the cross depicted as bringing about the necessary transformation and establishing a dynamic of spiritual childhood moving beyond the logic of the law and blood relationships. Edoardo Maria Palma
155149 Op. cit., p. 110.
(2016) describes Paul’s anthropology in Galatians as Christogenic (it starts from Christ), Christomorphic (it focuses on the transformation of believers in Christ) and Christotelic (it aims at totally fulfilling Christ in the lives of believers). Susan Grove Eastman
156150 T. Engberg-Pedersen, “Von der ‘Sünde’ zur ‘Tugend’: Worum geht es eigentlich bei Paulus?”, Zeitschrift für Neues Testament 16:32 (2013), pp. 37–47.
(2017) thinks that Paul did not conceive of the human self as something autonomous but as constituted in relationship to sin, Christ and others. Eastman traces this notion in Romans 7 (the human self and sin), Philippians 2 (Christ’s participation in the human condition) and Galatians 2:19–20 (the reconstituted self, united to Christ). Gitte Buch-Hansen
157151 J.-N. Aletti, New Approaches for Interpreting the Letters of Saint Paul: Collected Essays: Rhetoric, Soteriology, Christology and Ecclesiology: Translated from the French by Peggy Manning Meyer (Subsidia Biblica 43, Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2012), pp. 79–110.
(2017) points out the similarities between Paul’s view of original sin (as can be seen in the vice list in 5:19–21 and the Sarah-Hagar allegory) and the discourse on anthropology in Hellenistic philosophy (Philo, Epicureanism and Stoicism). Marek Kozák
158152 G. Röhser, “Paulus und die Herrschaft der Sünde”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 103:1 (2012), pp. 84–110.
https://doi.org/10.1515/znw-2012-0005
(2017) focuses on the anthropology of 5:16–26 and Romans 7:7–14, arguing that the pericope in Galatians describes the inner struggle of believers, whereas the pericope in Romans refers to this type of struggle in humans in general. Anthony C. Thiselton
159153 G. Hansen, “Luther’s Radical Conception of Faith: God, Christ, and Personhood in a Post-Metaphysical Age”, Dialog: A Journal of Theology 52:3 (2013), pp. 212–221. https://doi.org/10.1111/dial.12046
(2018) points out that some people think that Paul did not have a high estimation of human reason but draws attention to 3:1 and other passages showing that this is not true. In 3:1, Paul pleads that the Galatians should not be bewitched, and that they should rather use their reason. According to Dong-Su Seo
160154 J.B.P. Mukwemulere, “Figures de la promesse et de la loi dans l’Épître de Paul aux Galates: (2) Quelques propositions théologiques”, Sémiotique et Bible 156 (2014), pp. 5–27.
(2019), Paul’s reference to the blessing of Abraham in 3:13–14 should be understood in terms of Abraham’s role as the unifying archetype of humankind. In him, Jews and Gentiles are united in Christ. On the basis of 3:26–28, 1 Corinthians 7:17–24 and 12:1–31, Luca Castiglioni
161155 E.M. Palma, Trasformàti in Cristo: L’antropologia Paolina nella Lettera ai Galati (Analecta Biblica 217, Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2016).
(2019) argues that Paul’s view on equality and differences between human beings was decisively influenced by his eschatological perspective. Equality between believers and all human beings stemmed from the unity between believers in Christ. On the basis of an exegetical study of 6:11–18, Emmanuel O. Oyemomi
162156 S.G. Eastman, Paul and the Person: Reframing Paul’s Anthropology (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2017), pp. 151–175. For a response to Eastman’s views, see: J.A. Linebaugh, “Participation and the Person in Pauline Theology: A Response to Susan Eastman’s Paul and the Person”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 40:4 (2018), pp. 516–523.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064x18769517
(2019) contends that anthropology forms the core of Pauline thought, in particular the notion of the new human being in Christ. In a study of the flesh-Spirit antithesis in Romans and Galatians, Brian H. Thomas
163157 G. Buch-Hansen, “Early Conceptions of Original Sin: Reading Galatians through Philo’s De opificio mundi”, in: J.R. Dodson and A.W. Pitts (eds.), Paul and the Greco-Roman Philosophical Tradition (Library of New Testament Studies 527, London/Oxford/New York NY: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2017), pp. 221–243.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567678362.ch-011
(2020) argues that the “overlap of ages” scheme generally accepted by Pauline scholars to explain this antithesis is not adequate. Thomas proposes a tripartite salvation-historical schema: SH-yesterday (time in the flesh), SH-now (time in the Spirit before the parousia) and SH-soon (time after Christ’s return). Mihai Afrenţoae
164158 M. Kozák, La Lotta Interiore dell’Uomo: Uno Studio Esegetico-Teologico di Gal 5,16–26 e Rm 7,14–25 (Tesi Gregoriana Serie Teologia 227, Roma: Editrice Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 2017).
(2020) offers an anthropological-ethical analysis of the concept “liberty” (and related concepts) in Galatians. The letter has a multi-dimensional perspective of liberty. Liberty is depicted as liberty from sin, from this evil age and from the Jewish law. This gift of liberty also implies ethical responsibility on the part of believers. David A. deSilva
165159 A.C. Thiselton, Puzzling Passages in Paul: Forty Conundrums Calmly Considered (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2018), pp. 188–191.
(2020) summarises Paul’s views of the human condition in Galatians as follows: “[T]he individual human being finds himself or herself at the mercy of coercive pressures to conform not to the righteousness of rebellion of generations of human beings … and to the disordered desires and impulses of our own hearts … God’s remedy involves reconciliation, the restoration of righteousness, and rescue from the forces that conspire against that restoration.”
166160 D.-S. Seo, “The Theological Implications of Abraham as a Prototype of Unification of the Human Race in Light of the Multiracial and Multicultural Context of Galatians 3:14”, 신약논단 26:1 (2019), pp. 177–214.
https://doi.org/10.31982/knts.2019.3.26.1.177
10.2 Ethnicity
Denise Kimber Buell and Caroline Johnson Hodge
167161 L. Castiglioni, “Uguaglianza Battesimale e Differenze Carismatiche: La Prospettiva Paolina Fondamentale (I)”, Scuola Cattolica 147:4 (2019), pp. 667–693.
(2004) challenge interpretations of Pauline letters (amongst others, 3:28) that are based on the notion of ethnicity as a “given”. Instead, they propose a dynamic approach based on the insight that notions of ethnicity and race are constructed socially. Accordingly, they illustrate how Paul can be interpreted in an imaginative way so that differences between people are neither removed nor ranked hierarchically. According to Charles H. Cosgrove
168162 E.O. Oyemomi, “The Centrality of Pauline Anthropology: An Overview of the Book to the Galatians via Analytical Exegesis of Gal. 6:11–18”, BTSK Insight 16:2 (2019), pp. 146–170.
(2006), 3:28 sheds some light on the question of whether Paul valued ethnicity: “Certainly in his vision of the final conclusion of God’s saving work, Paul sees the end of life as we know it. In that consummation of all things, ethnic differences will disappear, giving way to the ultimate. In the meantime, penultimately, they both come to an end and are preserved. The ultimate qualifies their penultimate preservation.”
169163 B.H. Thomas, Living in the Flesh by the Spirit: The Pauline View of Flesh and Spirit in Galatians (Eugene OR: Wipf & Stock, 2020). Caroline Johnson Hodge
170164 M. Afrențoae, “Lo Spartito della Libertà nella Lettera ai Galati”, Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai: Theologia Catholica Latina 65:1 (2020), pp. 21–50.
https://doi.org/10.24193/theol.cath.latina.2020.lxv.1.02
(2007) challenges the notion that ethnicity was not important to Paul. According to Hodge, Paul was mainly concerned about the status of Gentiles who were alienated from God and believed that they became descendants of Abraham through baptism. As such they formed a related but separate lineage of Abraham. Khiok-khng Yeo
171165 D.A. deSilva, “Sin, Slavery, Sacrifice, and the Spirit: The Human Problem and Divine Solution in Galatians”, in: N.K. Gupta and J.K. Goodrich (eds.), Sin and Its Remedy in Paul (Contours of Pauline Theology, Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2020), pp. 99–113.
(2007) emphasises the fact that Paul’s understanding of culture is theological. Paul thus does not differentiate faith from culture and is sensitive to cultural behaviour marginalising others. According to Markus Öhler
172166 Op. cit., p. 112–113.
(2012), the decisive issue in the Antioch incident was ethnicity. Before “the ones from James” turned up, ethnicity did not play any role in the congregation as long as cultic and social rules were adhered to. However, the ecclesiology of the church in Jerusalem was different. The Christian congregations were regarded as the renewed Israel, but such a view was based on ethnicity and thus it was believed that certain identity markers had to characterise the congregation in Antioch, too. Aaron Sherwood
173167 D.K. Buell and C.J. Hodge, “The Politics of Interpretation: The Rhetoric of Race and Ethnicity in Paul”, Journal of Biblical Literature 123:2 (2004), pp. 235–251.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3267944
(2013) is of the opinion that ethnicity is one of the issues that Paul sweeps aside in 3:28 and that he focuses on social unity (not uniformity), in particular within the church. William S. Campbell
174168 C.H. Cosgrove, “Did Paul Value Ethnicity?”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 68:2 (2006), pp. 268–290. See also: C.H. Cosgrove, “Paul and Ethnicity: A Selective History of Interpretation”, in: M.D. Given (ed.), Paul Unbound: Other Perspectives on the Apostle (Peabody MA/Edinburgh: Hendrickson, 2010), pp. 71–98.
(2013) believes that Paul did not oppose all ethnic distinctions. From Paul’s letters it is clear that he distinguished between Jews and Greeks. He thus did not advocate cultural or social uniformity. According to Valérie Nicolet
175169 Op. cit., p. 279. Emphasis Cosgrove.
(2014), the postcolonial concept of hybridity is only partially useful for analysing Paul’s views on ethnicity, since he remained inscribed in the binary patterns of his time and cannot be seen as the founder of a true universalism. Instead, he ceaselessly had to negotiate differences in his congregations, as may be seen in Galatians 5 and 6. Ishay Rosen-Zvi and Adi Ophir
176170 C.J. Hodge, If Sons, Then Heirs: A Study of Kinship and Ethnicity in the Letters of Paul (New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2007).
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195182163.001.0001
(2015) challenge the notion that Paul borrowed the binary distinction between Jews and ἔθνη (“peoples”) from a Jewish tradition, since such a tradition did not exist. Instead, Paul played a major role in forming the notion of ἔθνη in a non-ethnic and generalised sense and thereby consolidating a binary division between them and the Jews. According to Ryan Schellenberg
177171 K.-K. Yeo, “The Debate in Galatians on Culture and Theology”, Journal for the Study of Christian Culture 18 (2007), pp. 43–62.
(2015), ethnicity was important to Paul. This is also true of 3:28, since although he believed that Gentile believers gained a new ethnic affiliation, this did not mean that they lost their original ethnic affiliation. Simon Butticaz
178172 M. Öhler, “Essen, Ethnos, Identität: Der antiochenische Zwischenfall (Gal 2,11–14)”, in: W. Weiβ (ed.), Der eine Gott und das gemeinschaftliche Mahl: Inklusion und Exklusion biblischer Vorstellungen von Mahl und Gemeinschaft im Kontext antiker Festkultur (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 113, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2012), pp. 158–199.
(2015) thinks that Paul’s views on identity in Galatians do not constitute an ethnic discourse but rather an anthropological and cosmological discourse, since believers (Jews and Gentiles) are said to become a “new creation” (6:15) and not a “new people”. In another study, Butticaz
179173 A. Sherwood, Paul and the Restoration of Humanity in Light of Ancient Jewish Traditions (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 82, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2013), pp. 217–221.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004235472
(2017) discusses the way in which Paul tried to manage particular ethnic parameters in Galatians and 1 Corinthians by looking at dietary issues. In the case of Galatians, Butticaz finds that Paul used a type of anthropological logic according to which the distinctive habits of both Jews and Gentiles were re-ordered by a Christological “meta-identity.” Ole Jakob Filtvedt
180174 W.S. Campbell, “Differentiation and Discrimination in Paul’s Ethnic Discourse”, Transformation 30:3 (2013), pp. 157–168.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0265378813490472
(2016) disagrees with Denise Kimber Buell and Caroline Johnson Hodge,
181175 V. Nicolet, “Penser la différence chez Paul: Enjeux ethniques dans Galates”, Foi et Vie 114:1 (2014), pp. 4–25.
who reject a metaphorical interpretation of Paul’s ethnic language. Filtvedt illustrates how a metaphorical reading of 3:26–29 makes sense and helps one to understand why he rejected the notion that Galatian believers should be circumcised.John M.G. Barclay
182176 I. Rosen-Zvi and A. Ophir, “Paul and the Invention of the Gentiles”, The Jewish Quarterly Review 105:1 (2015), pp. 1–41.
https://doi.org/10.1353/jqr.2015.0001
(2017) disagrees with scholars who are of the opinion that Paul redefines the ethnicity of Gentiles. Instead, Barclay thinks that an investigation of the two Pauline motifs of descendance from Abraham and adoption as children indicate the notion of an identity created by God, paradigmatically realised in Israel, making the retention of ethnic particularity in congregations possible in such a way that mutual appreciation may occur. Alfonso Garciá Marques
183177 R. Schellenberg, “Seed of Abraham (Friesen?): Universality and Ethnicity in Paul”, Direction 44:1 (2015), pp. 16–29.
(2017) draws out the philosophical implications of 4:4 for understanding the position of Christianity. The blending of the Greek episteme and the Roman ius into the humanitas constituted the “fulness of time”. This means that Christianity is a universal religion and not merely a Hellenised or Romanised religion. Erich S. Gruen
184178 S. Butticaz, “Vers une anthropologie universelle? La crise galate: Fragile gestion de l’ethnicité juive”, New Testament Studies 61:4 (2015), pp. 505–524.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688515000168
(2017) focuses on the criteria that Paul applies when distinguishing between Jews and non-Jews. According to Gruen, Paul had in mind “a range of unspecified practices, rituals, ceremonies, customary behavior and distinctive activities like Sabbath observance, synagogue attendance and dietary restrictions that characterized his fellow-Jews or indeed others, like God-fearers, who had become an integral part of Jewish communities”.
185179 S. Butticaz, “Paul and Ethnicity between Discourse and Social Practices”, Early Christianity 8:3 (2017), pp. 309–335, in particular, p. 334.
https://doi.org/10.1628/186870317X15017545210206
Ishay Rosen-Zvi and Adi Ophir
186180 O.J. Filtvedt, “A ‘Non-Ethnic’ People”, Biblica 97:1 (2016), pp. 101–120.
(2017) revisit Daniel Boyarin’s A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity.
187181 D.K. Buell and C.J. Hodge, “The Politics of Interpretation: The Rhetoric of Race and Ethnicity in Paul”, Journal of Biblical Literature 123:2 (2004), pp. 235–251.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3267944
Taking the criticism raised against Boyarin’s views into account, they argue that both Boyarin and his critics are correct: “Paul does not create a universal person, since his distinctions depend on the biblical narrative of election. But he does create a universal goy: an individualized, generalized category that applies to any person save the Jews.”
188182 J.M.G. Barclay, “An Identity Received from God: The Theological Configuration of Paul’s Kinship Discourse”, Early Christianity 8:3 (2017), pp. 354–372. https://doi.org/10.1628/186870317X15017545210224 Adi Ophir and Ishay Rosen-Zvi
189183 A. García Marqués, “τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου: Humanismo Romano y Religión Cristiana”, Revista Española de Teología 77:3 (2017), pp. 319‑348.
(2018) trace the development of the distinction between Jews and Gentiles in history, showing that Paul was the first person to use “Gentiles” as an abstract concept and that this notion later became a stable element in Rabbinic literature. William S. Campbell
190184 E.S. Gruen, “Paul and Jewish Ethnicity”, in: C. Fonrobert, I. Rosen-Zvi, A. Shemesh and M. Vidas (eds.), Talmudic Transgressions: Engaging the Work of Daniel Boyarin (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 181, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017), pp. 351–367.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004345331_013
(2018) disagrees with scholars who think that Paul abandoned his Jewish identity when he became a believer. Campbell argues that Paul’s letters show that he upheld ethnic distinctions between Jews and Gentiles although he resisted any discrimination based on ethnic distinctions. Philip A. Harland
191185 Op. cit., p. 367.
(2019) identifies two strategies by which minorities in the ancient world reacted to the hegemonic categorisation typical of their times: employing/adapting such categorisation or offering alternatives to dominant hierarchies. According to Harland, from Paul’s letters it is clear that he followed the first strategy. Philo and Josephus used the same strategies, albeit in a different fashion from that of Paul. Christopher D. Stanley
192186 I. Rosen-Zvi and A. Ophir, “Paul and the Universal goyim: ‘A Radical Jew’ Revisited”, in: C. Fonrobert, I. Rosen-Zvi, A. Shemesh and M. Vidas (eds.), Talmudic Transgressions: Engaging the Work of Daniel Boyarin (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 181, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017), pp. 368–387.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004345331_014
(2020) disagrees with scholars who regard Paul as a cosmopolitan thinker. According to Stanley, one should rather describe Paul as a Jewish sectarian who had a vision of a better world, although this vision was limited to believers and relegated them to a marginal position similar to that of Jewish communities in his time. Philip la G. du Toit
193187 D. Boyarin, A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity (Berkeley CA: University of California Press, 1994).
(2020) draws attention to the division between divine and human identity in the New Testament and the way in which scholars try to explain it. Du Toit argues that Paul regarded the believer’s identity primarily as a theological reality and not as an anthropological reality, the emphasis being on the spiritual life and identity that God provides in Christ. One of the examples that Du Toit discusses is 4:9–19, where Paul views religious practices as distracting people from the kingdom of God.
11. Israel, covenant and Abraham
Robby J. Kagarise
194188 Rosen-Zvi and A. Ophir, op. cit., p. 370.
(2000) disagrees with scholars who view Paul’s use of texts from Genesis in Galatians 3:16 as problematic. According to Kagarise, this verse helps one to understand Paul’s view of the covenant, Christ and believers. Paul interprets the seed in the light of the Christ-event as referring to Christ. It is fulfilled in an individual (Christ) but also collectively (in all believers). William J. Dumbrell
195189 A. Ophir and I. Rosen-Zvi, Goy: Israel’s Multiple Others and the Birth of the Gentile (Oxford Studies in the Abrahamic Religions, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018).
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198744900.001.0001
(2000) reads 3:1–14 from the perspective of the covenant. In Christ, God established a new covenant and a new form of forgiveness. All who kept on relying on obedience to the law, thinking that they were thereby staying in the covenant, fell under the curse of the law. In another contribution, Dumbrell
196190 W.S. Campbell, The Nations in the Divine Economy: Paul’s Covenantal Hermeneutics and Participation in Christ (Lanham MD: Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2018).
(2001) highlights a reluctance amongst New Testament scholars to give the covenant its due. According to Dumbrell, the term “works of the law” in 2:14–21 refers to the Sinai covenant and one should understand Paul as claiming that acceptance of the new covenant is only possible through faith in Christ. S.M. Baugh
197191 P.A. Harland, “Climbing the Ethnic Ladder: Ethnic Hierarchies and Judean Responses”, Journal of Biblical Literature 138:3 (2019), pp. 665–686.
https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1383.2019.156547
(2004) claims that 3:20 supports the Reformed view of the pactum salutis, the covenant of redemption, and in particular, the idea of an intratrinitarian arrangement, something that Moses could not mediate, since God is one. In an investigation of Paul’s theology of Israel, Richard H. Bell
198192 C.D. Stanley, “Paul the Cosmopolitan?”, New Testament Studies 66:1 (2020), pp. 144–163.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688519000249
(2005) considers Galatians 3 and 4, as well as 6:17. Bell finds evidence in these parts of the letter that Paul believed that the church, consisting of Gentile and Jewish believers, replaced Israel as God’s people. Scott W. Hahn
199193 P. la G. du Toit, “Ethnic Reasoning and Early Christian Identity: A Pauline Theological Perspective”, HTS: Theological Studies 76:1 (2020), pp. 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v76i1.5800
(2005) disagrees with scholars who interpret διαθήκη (“will” or “covenant”) in 3:15 as “will”. Hahn believes that it refers to the covenant with Abraham (Genesis 12:15–18) and that the covenant oath of the Adeqah is the subtext of Paul’s argument in this pericope. In another study, Hahn
200194 R.J. Kagarise, “The ‘Seed’ in Galatians 3:16 – A Window to Paul’s Thinking”, Evangelical Journal 18:2 (2000), pp. 67–73.
(2009) investigates the covenant in Scripture from a canonical perspective. With regard to Galatians 3 and 4, Hahn states: “Paul argues for the priority and primacy of the Abrahamic covenant — rather than the Mosaic — as the foundational covenant with Israel and ultimately with all mankind. … In contrast to the Abrahamic covenant, the Mosaic covenant — at least as renewed after the golden calf and other rebellions — is secondary and subordinate in Paul’s eyes.”
201195 W.J. Dumbrell, “Abraham and the Abrahamic Covenant in Galatians 3:1–14”, in: P. Bolt and M. Thompson (eds.), The Gospel to the Nations: Perspectives on Paul’s Mission (Downers Grove IL: IVP Apollos, 2000), pp. 19–31. In a study of law and covenant in Pauline theology, Jason C. Meyer
202196 W. Dumbrell, “Galatians 2:14–21: A New Covenant Perspective”, European Journal of Theology 10:2 (2001), pp. 105–116.
(2009) contends that Paul regarded the Mosaic covenant as essentially non-eschatological, differing from the (eschatologically) new covenant. In Galatians 3–4, Paul highlights the fact that the Mosaic covenant was wrongly understood as still having a soteriological function after it was divinely terminated. According to Albert L.A. Hogeterp
203197 S.M. Baugh, “Galatians 3:20 and the Covenant of Redemption”, The Westminster Theological Journal 66:1 (2004), pp. 49–70.
(2010), the differentiation in the type of covenants that one finds in 4:21–31 was not an invention of Paul’s, since there was already a diversification of ideas on the covenant in Second Temple Judaism. However, the way in which Paul presents two types of covenants by means of an antithesis was specifically aimed at discrediting his opponents who derived their authority from Jerusalem. Angelika Magnes
204198 R.H. Bell, The Irrevocable Call of God: An Inquiry into Paul’s Theology of Israel (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.184, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), pp. 160–180.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157300-2
(2010) draws attention to the fact that 4:21–31 has been interpreted in the past in an anti-Jewish fashion as indicating the removal of the Jewish nation as the primary salvation partner of God but points out that such a view is incorrect, since the pericope refers to a specific conflict in Galatia and does not address the relationship between Judaism and Christianity. Božidar Mrakovčić
205199 S.W. Hahn, “Covenant, Oath, and the Aqedah: διαθήκη in Galatians 3:15–18”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 67:1 (2005), pp. 79–100.
(2010) discusses Paul’s view of the covenant as found in 3:15–18 and in 4:21–31. Mrakovčić draws attention to the fact that Paul referred to the covenant as part of an argument defending his views on justification. His opponents regarded keeping the law as a condition for participation in the covenant – something that was completely unacceptable to him. In a study of the “Israel problem”, Michael Wolter
206200 S.W. Hahn, Kinship by Covenant: A Canonical Approach to the Fulfillment of God’s Saving Promises (Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library, New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 2009).
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvs32tbq
(2010) contends that there is no difference or any development in Paul’s views on this issue between 4:21–31 and Romans 9–11. In both cases the point is the same: Israel is far removed from Christ and does not play a role in the continuity of Abraham’s election. Wolter thus believes that Paul did not succeed in solving the “Israel problem”. Jason S. DeRouchie and Jason C. Meyer
207201 Op. cit., p. 276.
(2010) disagree with N.T. Wright, who interprets “seed” in 3:16 as referring not to the Messiah but to the united family of God. According to them, Paul emphasises the coming of Christ as the “seed” of Abraham, a fact that does not get its rightful place in Wright’s interpretation. William B. Barcley
208202 J.C. Meyer, The End of the Law: Mosaic Covenant in Pauline Theology (NAC Studies in Bible & Theology 6, Nashville TN: Broadman & Holman, 2009).
(2010) notes that scholars tend to find a stark contrast between the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants in 3:15–22 but contends that one should focus on the Christocentric nature of this passage. Then the unity and continuity in God’s dealings become clear. According to Jakob Wöhrle
209203 A.L.A. Hogeterp, “Hagar and Paul’s Covenant Thought”, in: M. Goodman, G.H. van Kooten and J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten (eds.), Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham (Themes in Biblical Narrative 13, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2010), pp. 345–359.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004216495_023
(2011), Isaac and Ishmael are depicted in Genesis 17 and in Galatians 4:21–31 as unequal and even as contradictory brothers and thus one cannot speak of an “Abrahamic ecumenism” (“abrahamische Ökumene”) in the Biblical traditions. Nevertheless, these texts may still be of importance for the interreligious and intercultural dialogue for our time. Aaron Sherwood
210204 A. Magnes, “‘Different Mothers, Births and Inheritances’: Die Rede von zwei Frauen in Gal 4,21–31”, in: I. Fischer and C. Heil (eds.), Geschlechterverhältnisse und Macht: Lebensformen in der Zeit des frühen Christentums (Exegese in unserer Zeit 21, Berlin: LIT Verlag, 2010), pp. 110–127.
(2013) interprets 6:11–18 as containing some references to the notion of the unification of Israel and the nations, since both groups were present amongst the recipients of the letter. Sherwood points out that the Jewish traditions normally associated with the notion of unification (worship, Scripture and the restoration of humankind) do not explicitly occur in the letter but that they are implied. T. David Gordon
211205 B. Mrakovčić, “Savez u Poslanici Galaćanima”, Bogoslovska Motra 80:1 (2010), pp. 275–296.
(2013) prefers a covenant-historical approach to a salvation-/covenant-theological approach to Galatians and offers an interpretation of the letter based on the notion that Paul traces three different covenant-administrations in the letter: the Abrahamic, Sinaic and New Covenants. M.C. Mulder
212206 M. Wolter, “Das Israelproblem nach Gal 4,21–31 und Röm 9–11”, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 107:1 (2010), pp. 1–30.
https://doi.org/10.1628/004435410790844557
(2013) thinks that in spite of the opposition between believers and the present Jerusalem in 4:21–31, there is also a clear line of continuity between God’s saving actions in the lives of Sarah and in the time of the exile and the salvation of believers in Paul’s time. Jeffrey J. Niehaus
213207 J.S. DeRouchie and J.C. Meyer, “Christ or Family as the ‘Seed’ of Promise? An Evaluation of N.T. Wright on Galatians 3:16”, The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 14:3 (2010), pp. 36–48.
(2013) disagrees with scholars who find two different covenants in Genesis 15 and 17. According to Niehaus, the two chapters refer to the same covenant – a notion that amongst others is confirmed by Paul’s depiction of the covenant in Galatians 3. Brendan Byrne
214208 W.B. Barcley, “The Law and the Promise: God’s Covenant with Abraham in Pauline Perspective”, in: S.A. Hunt (ed.), Perspectives on Our Father Abraham: Essays in Honor of Marvin R. Wilson (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2010), pp. 138–152.
(2014) rejects J. Louis Martyn’s interpretation of the two covenants in 4:21–5:1 (traditionally understood as referring to Judaism and Christianity) as referring to Paul’s opponents and Paul’s law-free mission to the Gentiles. Byrne defends the traditional interpretation but also points out that it does not necessarily imply an anti-Jewish interpretation of the text. According to Donald Cobb
215209 J. Wöhrle, “Isaak und Ismael: Zum Verhältnis der beiden Abrahamsöhne nach Genesis 17 und Galater 4,21–31”, Evangelische Theologie 71:2 (2011), pp. 115–132.
https://doi.org/10.14315/evth-2011-71-2-115
(2015), in Galatians 3 and 4, Paul does not react to the teaching of his opponents by merely opposing law and grace or law and faith as is often claimed. Rather, he reacts to an argument about the covenant by means of an argument about a different covenant. In another study, Cobb
216210 A. Sherwood, Paul and the Restoration of Humanity in Light of Ancient Jewish Traditions (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 82, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2013), pp. 221–231.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004235472
(2016) investigates the use of the term διαθήκη (“covenant” or “will”) in Galatians 3–4 and points out its importance in Paul’s theology. This shows that the redemption that God offers in Christ was structured by the law and the promises of the Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic and new covenants. In a study investigating the question as to what makes the Hebrew Scriptures Christian, J. David Stark
217211 T.D. Gordon, “Promise, Law, Faith: Covenant-Historical Reasoning in Galatians”, in: H.C. Kim (ed.), Galatians as Examined by Diverse Academics in 2012 (St. Andrews, Scotland) (Hermit Kingdom Studies in Christianity and Judaism 3, Newark NJ: The Hermit Kingdom Press, 2013), pp. 57–134.
(2016) argues that from the beginning the Christian church formulated a rule of faith, guiding it to properly hear the divine word and that this rule entailed a respect for the Hebrew Scriptures because it came from the Creator God. One of the passages that Stark uses to illustrate this idea, is 6:11–15. Bradley R. Trick
218212 M.C. Mulder, “Kinderen naar de Ordening van Izak: Continuïteit van Gods Verbond Belicht door een Intertextuele Exegese van Galaten 3 en 4”, Theologia Reformata 56:2 (2013), pp. 103–118.
(2016) proposes that Paul’s views of διαθήκη (“testament” or “covenant”) in Galatians 3–4 are best understood in terms of a Hellenistic testament by which God adopted Abraham, with “children” in 3:7 referring to Jews, “children of promise” in 4:28 referring to Gentiles and “seed” in 3:16 referring to Christ and the union of Gentiles and Jews in Christ in 3:29. Joel Marcus
219213 J.J. Niehaus, “God’s Covenant with Abraham”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 56:2 (2013), pp. 249–271.
(2017) looks critically at Martyn’s exegesis of 4:21–31 (especially the notion that it refers not to Judaism and Christianity but to the law-free mission and the law-obedient mission) and finds it indefensible. Philip la G. du Toit
220214 B. Byrne, “Jerusalems Above and Below: A Critique of J.L. Martyn’s Interpretation of the Hagar-Sarah Allegory in Gal 4.21–5.1”, New Testament Studies 60:2 (2014), pp. 215–231.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688513000362
(2018) critically evaluates the Radical New Perspective on Paul as well as the Messianic Judaist approach to Galatians and then highlights the criteria that Paul identifies for membership of the covenant in Galatians 3: a contrast between faith/works and Spirit/flesh and between the old era in the law/new era in Christ. This continues the promise to Abraham, but in a renewed, redrawn fashion. According to Dong-Su Seo
221215 D. Cobb, “Galates 3–4: Une alliance ni abrogée ni modifiée”, La Revue Réformée 275 (2015), pp. 1–30.
(2019), Paul’s reference to the blessing of Abraham in 3:13–14 should be understood in terms of Abraham’s role as the unifying archetype of humankind. In him, Jews and Gentiles are united in Christ. Debbie Hunn
222216 D.E. Cobb, “What Paul Says About the Covenants in Galatians 3–4”, Unio cum Christo 2:2 (2016), pp. 173–194.
https://doi.org/10.35285/ucc2.2.2016.art10
(2019) is of the opinion that Paul does not invert the story of Ishmael and Isaac in 4:21–31. It is rather an issue of separation. Paul separates the covenants of the law and the promise in order to convince the Galatians that they do not need both. Miguel G. Echevarria Jr.
223217 J.D. Stark, “What Makes Jewish Scripture Christian?”, Stone-Campbell Journal 19:2 (2016), pp. 219–237.
(2019) discusses the notion of inheritance in Paul’s letters. In the case of Galatians, Echevarria argues that Paul uses the term “promise” to refer to the land promised to Abraham and his offspring but understands it as referring eschatologically to the entire world that is still to come and that his views in this regard thus differ from later Jewish views on the matter. T. David Gordon
224218 B.R. Trick, Abrahamic Descent, Testamentary Adoption, and the Law in Galatians: Differentiating Abraham’s Sons, Seed, and Children of Promise (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 169, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2016).
(2019) is of the opinion that Paul uses synecdoche in Galatians to distinguish between three different covenant administrations: “promise”, “law” and “faith”. This implies that both current Protestant and New Perspective approaches to the covenant in the letter are wrong. These scholars do not realise that Paul’s reasoning was covenant-historical and that he thought of the new covenant as a covenant in its own right that displaced the Sinai covenant. According to Scott J. Hafemann
225219 J. Marcus, “Lou Martyn, Paul, and Judaism”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 7:1/2 (2017), pp. 112–118.
https://doi.org/10.5325/jstudpaullett.7.1-2.0112
(2019), from Galatians 3 and 4 it is clear that Paul thought that the eschatological restoration had dawned in Christ, thus ending the era of the Sinai covenant. However, the two covenants (of the flesh and of the Spirit respectively) would continue until the present evil age comes to an end. On the basis of Galatians 3 and 4, and Romans 11 and 15, Carlos Gil Arbiol
226220 P. la G. du Toit, “Galatians 3 and the Redefinition of the Criteria of Covenant Membership in the New Faith-Era in Christ”, Neotestamentica 52:1 (2018), pp. 41–67.
https://doi.org/10.1353/neo.2018.0002
(2019) argues for a coherence in Paul’s theology and a respect for his Jewish identity. Paul made an unusual contribution through his view that Gentiles had to be included in Israel in order for it to be renewed. He based congregations on this belief, but the project failed because Israel did not accept Christ as the Messiah. Eventually the process developed in ways that Paul had not foreseen. Philip la G. du Toit
227221 D.-S. Seo, “The Theological Implications of Abraham as the Archetype of Unification of the Human Race in Light of the Multiracial and Multicultural Context of Galatians 3:14”, 신약논단 26:1 (2019), pp. 177–214. https://doi.org/10.31982/knts.2019.3.26.1.177
(2020) argues that it is not correct to think of replacement theology as anti-Semitic. New Testament writings (amongst others, Galatians) use a variety of concepts to refer to the notion of replacement and it is clear that the criteria for membership are replaced in the new era in Christ and aspects such as race and ethnicity do not play a role anymore. Such a notion cannot be anti‑Semitic. In a study of Paul and the marginalised, Carla Swafford Works
228222 D. Hunn, “The Hagar-Sarah Allegory: Two Covenants, Two Destinies”, Biblica 100:1 (2019), pp. 117–134.
https://doi.org/10.2143/
(2020) reads Paul’s references to inheritance from the perspective of the Galatians as a subjugated people whose land the Romans had taken away. For them, the reference to the promises of Abraham and the way in which Paul links this to new life in the Spirit, inheriting the kingdom of God and the dawn of the new creation, would indeed have been good news.(See also the discussion of studies on the term “Israel of God” in 6:16 in Volume 2.)
12. Law
This theme has received much attention from scholars. This overview begins with studies of a more general nature before moving to studies focusing on specific aspects of the law in the letter.
12.1 Studies on the law in Galatians of a more general nature
Fabian E. Udoh
229
bib.100.1.3286053
(2000) is of the opinion that Paul’s negative views on the law were caused by the crisis in Galatia and that the antitheses circumcision/faith and law/faith formed part of his response to this crisis, after which they became part of the way in which he described the role of the law in salvation history. L. Ann Jervis
230223 M.G. Echevarria Jr., The Future Inheritance of Land in the Pauline Epistles (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2019), pp. 104–140.
(2000) explains Paul’s rhetoric in 3:19–25 in terms of an argument based on God’s faithfulness. God placed functional and temporal limits on the law, according to his redemptive plan. Wolfgang Reinbold
231224 T.D. Gordon, Promise, Law, Faith: Covenant-Historical Reasoning in Galatians (Peabody MA: Hendrickson Academic, 2019).
(2000) argues that it is clear from 3:6–14 (and other Pauline passages) that Paul thought it was possible to keep the law. However, he believed that only faith and not the keeping of the law could bring about justification. In a discussion of Paul’s view of the law in Galatians, Jan Lambrecht
232225 S.J. Hafemann, Paul: Servant of the New Covenant: Pauline Polarities in Eschatological Perspective (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.435, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019), pp. 52–89.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157702-4
Updated version of: S.J. Hafemann, “Paul and the Exile of Israel in Galatians 3–4”, in: J.M. Scott (ed.), Exile: Old Testament, Jewish and Christian Conceptions (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 56, Leiden: Brill, 1997), pp. 329‑371.
(2001) points out that he regarded the Christ event as a new initiative from God, totally overshadowing the law so that even the positive striving to keep the law did not make sense anymore. According to Moisés Silva
233226 C. Gil Arbiol, “La Novedad de Pablo en el Judaísmo se Su Tiempo: Un Debate Que No Acaba”, Revista Bíblica 81:1/2 (2019), pp. 91–117.
https://doi.org/10.47182/rb.81.n-201934
(2001), in Galatians 3, Paul is only critical of the soteriological function of the law. The law merely prepared for Christ’s coming, but it cannot give life. Accordingly, one may not radicalise the distinction between God’s promise and the law. Pratrap Chandre Gine
234227 P. la G. du Toit, “Is Replacement Theology Anti-Semitic?”, In die Skriflig 54:1 (2020), pp. 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ids.v54i1.2536
(2001) draws attention to the parallels between Paul’s and Philo’s views of the law and argues that Galatians is best understood in terms of the multi-ethnic setup so characteristic of the Graeco-Roman world. Gine also works out the implications of all of this for translating and interpreting Galatians in Bengali. Robert L. Brawley
235228 C.S. Works, The Least of These: Paul and the Marginalized (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2020), pp. 87–107.
(2002) contends that Paul believed that without the Abrahamic covenant, the Mosaic covenant equalled slavery. He thus synthesised the Mosaic and the Abrahamic covenants, as is clear from his discussion of the law in 3:19–22 and the interplay between the allegory in 4:21–31 and Isaiah. A. Andrew Das
236229 F.E. Udoh, “Paul’s Views on the Law: Questions About Origin (Gal. 1:6–2:21; Phil. 3:2–11)”, Novum Testamentum 42:3 (2000), pp. 214–237.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156853600506636
(2003) agrees with E.P. Sanders’s view that it is wrong to describe the self-understanding of the Jews of Paul’s time as legalistic. Yet Das also thinks that after the Damascus event Paul realised that obedience to the law constituted some kind of legalistic perfectionism. According to Roland Bergmeier
237230 L.A. Jervis, “Galatians 3:19–25 as an Argument for God’s Faithfulness: Reading Paul’s Rhetoric in Light of His Strategy”, Word & World 20:3 (2000), pp. 281–298.
(2003), in 3:19a, the law is not linked to justification but to transgressions. Its role is thus depicted as that of a caretaker (“Betreuerin”) of Jewish sinners. Friedrich Avemarie
238231 W. Reinbold, “Gal 3,6–14 und das Problem der Erfüllbarkeit des Gesetzes bei Paulus”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft
(2005) argues that Paul uses Leviticus 18:5 in different ways in Romans and Galatians. In Galatians 3:12, he uses it to show that the law has nothing to do with faith, but in Romans 10:5, he interprets the “doing” of the law in a Christian sense. Jens Schröter
239
91:1–2 (2000), pp. 91–106. und die Kunde der älteren Kirche
https://doi.org/10.1515/zntw.2000.91.1-2.91
(2007) offers a detailed analysis of Paul’s views on the law in Galatians, arguing that when writing this letter, Paul was confronted for the first time with the problem of defining the position of the Gentiles within the Christian community from a theological perspective. He did this in a creative way by distinguishing between promise and law in order to link the particularity of the Jewish law with the universality of the Christ event. Todd A. Wilson
240232 J. Lambrecht, “Second Thoughts: Some Reflections on the Law in Galatians”, Landas 15:1 (2001), pp. 68–77.
(2007) believes that the “agitators” (as Wilson calls them) warned the Galatians that they would be cursed by God if they were not circumcised. In contrast, Paul argued that fulfilment of “the law of Christ” is necessary, by loving one another in the Spirit and by bearing the burdens of others. On the basis of 3:10–14, Vincent M. Smiles
241233 M. Silva, Interpreting Galatians: Explorations in Exegetical Method (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2001 [1996], 2nd edition), pp. 187–195.
(2008) describes Paul’s main problem with the law as its inability to foster obedience. Thus, Paul regards it as a curse on humankind. However, this does not mean that he rejects its ongoing value. According to R. Barry Matlock
242234 P.C. Gine, Nomos in Context: Philo, Galatians and the Bengali Bible (Delhi: ISPCK, 2001).
(2009), from 3:10–14 it is clear that Paul thought that the law had a very important role but that its role had ended with Christ’s arrival. The actual words of the law were Scripture and the main thing Scripture still revealed was that the law no longer had any significance. In a study of law and covenant in Pauline theology, Jason C. Meyer
243235 R.L. Brawley, “Contextuality, Intertextuality, and the Hendiadic Relationship of Promise and Law in Galatians”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 93:1–2 (2002), pp. 99–119.
https://doi.org/10.1515/zntw.2002.010
(2009) contends that Paul regarded the Mosaic covenant as essentially non-eschatological, differing from the (eschatologically) new covenant. In Galatians 3–4, Paul highlights the fact that the Mosaic covenant was wrongly understood as still having a soteriological function after it was divinely terminated. According to Mark D. Nanos
244236 A.A. Das, Paul and the Jews (Library of Pauline Studies, Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 2003).
(2009), the idea that Paul did not follow Jewish dietary regulations and that he did not want his followers to observe them does not hold true, since texts such as 2:11–15 (and 1 Corinthians 8–10 and Romans 14–15) that are interpreted to support such a view actually show the opposite. Nicole Chibici-Revneanu
245237 R. Bergmeier, “‘Welche Bedeutung kommt dann dem Gesetz zu?’ (Gal 3,19a)”, Theologische Zeitschrift 59:1 (2003), pp. 35–48.
https://doi.org/10.5169/seals-877914
(2009) compares Paul’s views of the law in Galatians and Romans and detects a specific development in Romans. In Galatians, the law is depicted as the oppressor, but in Romans, it is depicted as itself being governed by sin and in need of liberation by the Spirit. Peter Oakes
246238 F. Avemarie, “Paul and the Claim of the Law According to Scripture: Leviticus 18:5 in Galatians 3:12 and Romans 10:5”, in: J. Pastor and M. Mor (eds.), The Beginnings of Christianity: A Collection of Articles (Jerusalem: Yad ben-Zvi Press, 2005), pp. 125–148. Also available in: J. Frey and A. Standhartinger (eds.), Friedrich Avemarie: Neues Testament und frührabbinisches Judentum: Gesammelte Aufsätze (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.316, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013), pp. 511–530.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152924-5
(2009) highlights the relationship between theology and law in Galatians, arguing that any optimistic reading of the law in this letter is misguided, since, according to Paul, the law had an important role historically, but that role ended with the coming of Christ. Debbie Hunn
247239 J. Schröter, “Die Universalisierung des Gesetzes im Galaterbrief: Ein Beitrag zum Gesetzesverständnis des Paulus”, in: J. Schröter (ed.), Von Jesus zum Neuen Testament: Studien zur urchristlichen Theologiegeschichte und zur Entstehung des neutestamentlichen Kanons (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.204, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), pp. 171–201.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151493-7
(2010) explains Paul’s logic in 2:14–21 as follows: 1. The law does not justify humans but condemns them (expressed in the first-person plural); 2. Since Christ liberated believers from the law, they should not return to it (expressed in the first person singular). Holly Taylor Coolman
248240 T.A. Wilson, The Curse of the Law and the Crisis in Galatia: Reassessing the Purpose of Galatians (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.225, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157075-9
(2010) opts for replacing the notion of supersession with a focus on Christ in relation to the law and the law in relation to Christ. In the case of 3:28, Taylor stresses the fact that being clothed in Christ depicts the context within which the obligation of individuals is placed. Gab-Jon Choi
249241 V.M. Smiles, “The Blessing of Israel and the ‘Curse of the Law’: A Study of Galatians 3:10–14”, Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 3:1 (2008), pp. 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.6017/scjr.v3i1.1481
(2011) offers a hermeneutical-rhetorical analysis of 3:10–12 in which the reciprocal relationship between the law and faith is highlighted. Yon-Gyong Kwon
250242 R.B. Matlock, “Helping Paul’s Argument Work? The Curse of Galatians 3.10–14”, in: M. Tait and P. Oakes (eds.), The Torah in the New Testament: Papers Delivered at the Manchester-Lausanne Seminar of June 2008 (Library of New Testament Studies 401, London: T & T Clark, 2009), pp. 154–179.
(2011) contrasts the failure of the law to give life with the ability of the gospel to do so. From Galatians and Romans, it is clear that Paul was of the view that God did not intend the law to be the source of the life-giving Spirit, as it is weak. Jin Seob Lee
251243 J.C. Meyer, The End of the Law: Mosaic Covenant in Pauline Theology (NAC Studies in Bible & Theology 6, Nashville TN: Broadman & Holman, 2009), pp. 116–176.
(2011) thinks that Paul’s view of the law in Galatians and Romans is positive, as he thinks of it as revealing God’s norms, enabling humans to identify sin and as being able to lead humans to Christ. However, Paul had a quite negative view of contemporary Jewish nomism. A. Andrew Das
252244 M.D. Nanos, “The Myth of the ‘Law-Free’ Paul Standing between Christians and Jews”, Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 4:1 (2009), pp. 1–22.
https://doi.org/10.6017/scjr.v4i1.1511
(2012) disagrees with the widespread notion that the premise omitted in 3:10 is that people are unable to obey the law perfectly. Das provides evidence from Deuteronomy and Second Temple Judaism that such a premise would not have been strange in Paul’s time. Sławomir Stasiak
253245 N. Chibici-Revneanu, “Der befreite Unterdrücker: Beherrschungs- und Befreiungsmetaphorik in der Beschreibung des Gesetzes im Galater- und im Römerbrief”, in: U. Schnelle (ed.), The Letter to the Romans (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 226, Leuven: Peeters, 2009), pp. 425–439.
(2012) points out that Paul only criticises the “works of the law” in Galatians, since he views them as insufficient for the education of believers. The only proper education for them is the gospel of Christ that he received directly from the Risen Christ. Waldemar Rakocy
254246 P. Oakes, “Law and Theology in Galatians”, in: P. Oakes and M. Tait (eds.), Torah in the New Testament: Papers Delivered at the Manchester-Lausanne Seminar of June 2008 (Library of New Testament Studies 401, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2009), pp. 143–153.
(2013) argues that if one compares the term διατάσσω (“ordain”) in 3:19 to its use in other Greek sources, it is clear that Paul ascribes more competences to the angels than were normally assumed in Judaism. According to this verse, they did not merely play a mediating role but were themselves responsible for administering the law, as well as its shape. It was also their initiative to instruct humanity by means of the law. Francesco Bianchini
255247 D. Hunn, “Christ versus the Law: Issues in Galatians 2:17–18”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 72:3 (2010), pp. 537–555.
(2013) detects a coherent development in Paul’s references to the law in 5:13–6:10 (in 5:14, 23 and 6:2), culminating in 6:2 where Paul claims that believers do not need the law of Moses anymore, since they have “the law of Christ” and are guided by the Spirit. Debbie Hunn
256248 H.T. Coolman, “Christological Torah”, Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 5:1 (2010), pp. 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.6017/scjr.v5i1.1557
(2013) is of the opinion that the whole pericope 3:19–25 addresses the function of the law. Paul first highlights the inferiority of the law to the promise. This leads to his question in v. 21 and the analogy of a jailer and a pedagogue in the rest of the pericope. Paul C. Maxwell
257249 G.-J. Choi, “The Reciprocal Relationship between Law and Faith in Galatians 3:10–12”, 신약논단 18:4 (2011), pp. 1145–1181.
(2013) disagrees with Krister Stendahl’s view of Paul’s robust conscience. One of the arguments that Maxwell advances is that Stendahl interpreted 3:24 incorrectly. The law did not lose its relevance when the Messiah came: it only stopped imprisoning believers. Todd A. Wilson
258250 Y.-G. Kwon, “The Law Which Cannot Give Life and the Life-Giving Gospel: Paul’s Gospel and His View of the Law”, Canon & Culture 5:2 (2011), pp. 45–80.
(2013) disagrees with scholars who think that Paul argues for the supersession and the superfluity of the law in Galatians. Paul instead tries to convince his Gentile readers that the curse of the law was suspended for believers who walk by the Spirit and in this way fulfil the law. According to Brian S. Rosner
259251 J.S. Lee, “Paul and the Law: Paul’s Understanding of the Law Commonly Delineated in Romans and Galatians”, Canon & Culture 5:2 (2011), pp. 5–45.
(2013), Paul continually treats the law in three ways in his letters: he repudiates, replaces and reappropriates it. This also happens in Galatians, in which case he repudiates it in 3:23–25 and 5:18, replaces it in 2:5, 14, 3:23–25, 5:18 and 6:2 and reappropriates it in 4:21–31 (as prophecy) and 5:14 (as wisdom). Seung Moon Lee
260252 A.A. Das, “Galatians 3:10: A ‘Newer Perspective’ on an Omitted Premise”, in: C.W. Skinner and K.R. Iverson (eds.), Unity and Diversity in the Gospels and Paul: Essays in Honor of Frank J. Matera (SBL Early Christianity and Its Literature 7, Atlanta GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012), pp. 203–223.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt32bz4b.17
(2014) notes that Paul links three concepts, “curse”, “blessing” and “promise”, to Christ in 3:10–14. Furthermore, Paul puts everyone as well as Christ under the curse in order to restore the peace amongst the Galatians. Stefan Nordgaard
261253 S. Stasiak, “Niewystarczalność Prawa w Wychowaniu Według Listu do Galatów”, Verbum Vitae 21 (2012), pp. 159–181.
https://doi.org/10.31743/vv.1541
(2014) interprets Paul’s view of the law reflected in 3:19–20 as follows: God commissioned a group of angels to ordain the law. God was thus behind the law, but he was neither responsible for, nor attached to it. According to Nordgaard, there is some similarity between Paul’s views and Philo’s views on the origin of sin. A. Chadwick Thornhill
262254 W. Rakocy, “Znaczenie Czasownika διατάσσω w Źródłach Biblijnych: W Nawiązaniu do διαταγεὶς διʼ ἀγγέλων w Ga 3,19b”, The Biblical Annals 3:2
(2014) draws attention to Paul’s “spherical language” when he talks about Christ and the law in Galatians as is evident from his use of three prepositions (ἐν [“in”], ἐκ [“from”] and ὑπό [“under”]). Paul chiefly contrasts people belonging to the realm of Christ with those belonging to the realm of the law. Peter von der Osten-Sacken
263
(2013), pp. 383–419.
(2014) highlights the implications of 4:4 for Paul’s view of the law. Von der Osten-Sacken summarises this perspective as a depiction of the law in the field of tension (“Spannungsfeld”) between eschatology and history. Through Christ the era of the law has come to an end. This implies on the one hand that believers were liberated from the law that condemned them, but on the other hand that the law also protects them against enthusiasm, making it possible for them to live in this world. In another contribution, Von der Osten-Sacken
264255 F. Bianchini, “Il νόμος in Gal 5,13–6,10”, Biblica 94:1 (2013), pp. 47–62.
(2014) points out an issue in Paul’s view of the law that is often ignored, namely that of freedom by means of the law, in particular the Pauline idea that freedom towards other people becomes possible through a contemplation of what the law requires in this regard and what the Spirit enables through the keeping of the law. On the basis of the depiction of Abraham in 3:6–14, Thomas Witulski
265256 D. Hunn, “‘Why Therefore the Law?’ The Role of the Law in Galatians 3:19–20”, Neotestamentica 47:2 (2013), pp. 355–372.
(2014) argues that Paul’s opponents in Galatia believed that sonship of Abraham (i.e., the blessing and justification associated with this notion) was based on the law. In this part of the letter, Paul thus argues against such a “soteriological dysfunctionality” of the law. Rodney Reeves
266257 P.C. Maxwell, “Analyzing the Apostle Paul’s ‘Robust Conscience’: Identifying and Engaging the Psychological Concerns of Krister Stendahl’s Inceptive Article”, The Westminster Theological Journal 75:1 (2013), pp. 145–164.
(2015) claims that “Paul saw himself as the mediator of the law of Christ, the ‘new’ Moses of the Abrahamic covenant fulfilled in Christ Jesus. Paul was the one who delivered the gospel to them, and therefore he was the only one appointed by God to interpret the law of Christ for them.”
267258 T.A. Wilson, “The Supersession and Superfluity of the Law? Another Look at Galatians”, in: D. Rudolph and J. Willitts (eds.), Introduction to Messianic Judaism: Its Ecclesial Context and Biblical Foundations (Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan, 2013), pp. 235–242.
Christopher Zoccali
268259 B.S. Rosner, Paul and the Law: Keeping the Commandments of God (New Studies in Biblical Theology 31, Downers Grove IL/Nottingham: IVP Academic, 2013).
(2015) is of the opinion that Paul’s purpose in 3:10–12 is to dissuade Gentile believers from accepting proselyte conversion while he still accepts that the law remains valid for defining Jewish identity. Debbie Hunn
269260 S.M. Lee, “Christ, the Triple Object of Curses, Blessings, and Promises, and the Galatian Church: Focusing on the Structural Analysis and Social Situation of Galatians 3:10–14”, 한국신약학회 21:4 (2014), pp. 1129‑1162.
(2015) thinks that in order to make sense of Paul’s argument in 3:10–12, one should realise that his implicit assumption in v. 10 is not that no one can keep the law (the Galatians would not agree with such a view) but that the law either justifies people or condemns them. There is not a third option. In another contribution (on 3:22–23), Hunn
270261 S. Nordgaard, “Paul and the Provenance of the Law: The Case of Galatians 3,19–20”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 105:1 (2014), pp. 64–79.
https://doi.org/10.1515/znw-2014-0004
(2015) disagrees with scholars who interpret Paul as saying that the law condemned the world so that Christ would be their only hope. The law rather punished transgressions so that the Abrahamic promise could be received by faith. Jason A. Staples
271262 A.C. Thornhill, “‘Spheres of Influence’ in the Epistle to the Galatians”, Horizons in Biblical Theology 36:1 (2014), pp. 21–41.
https://doi.org/10.1163/18712207-12341268
(2015) explains the text-critical alternative “deeds” instead of “transgressions” in 3:19a as “1) an orthodox corruption to exclude Marcionite and other demiurgic interpretations and 2) an important example of an early Latin harmonization impacting the readings of P46 and other early manuscripts”.
272263 P. von der Osten-Sacken, Der Gott der Hoffnung: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Theologie des Paulus (Studien zu Kirche und Israel: Neue Folge 3, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2014), pp. 248–285. In a comparison between the depiction of the law in Galatians and 4 Maccabees, Thomas Witulski
273264 P. von der Osten-Sacken, Der Gott der Hoffnung: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Theologie des Paulus (Studien zu Kirche und Israel: Neue Folge 3, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2014), pp. 356–368.
(2015) finds Paul’s view of the law to be the exact opposite (“Negativfolie”) of the view of the law in 4 Maccabees. For example, Paul rejects the primacy of the law when it comes to salvation and regards it as only a preserving pedagogue, whereas 4 Maccabees portrays the law as a teacher guiding people to salvation. Guido Baltes
274265 T. Witulski, “Die Gestalt des Abraham als Beleg für die soteriologische Dysfunktionalität des νόμος: Erwägungen zu Struktur und Argumenta
(2016) disagrees with the widespread idea that “freedom from the law” is a characteristic of Paul’s theology. The expression occurs twice in Romans and is absent from Galatians, and the statements in Galatians that are often interpreted as indicating freedom from the law, such as being “under” the law and being supervised by a pedagogue, focus on other issues. Christoph Heil
275
Studien zum Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt 39 (2014), pp. 159–205. tion von Gal 3,6–14”,
(2016) points out that Paul does not deny the divine establishment of the law but relativises its significance in salvation history. The Galatians should keep to the promise that came directly from God and not to the law which came to humanity through a twofold mediation (Heil describes the law as “doppelt vermittelt”). Gary E. Gilthvedt
276266 R. Reeves, “The New Moses of the Law of Christ: Paul in Galatians”, Criswell Theological Review 12:2 (2015), pp. 71–82.
(2016) evaluates the level of continuity between the law and Paul’s gospel by interpreting 2:19 in the light of the letter as a whole. Gilthvedt argues that the law primarily bestows curse and death. Even Christ’s death was caused by the power of the law and, according to v. 19, believers died with him on the cross. Brigitte Kahl
277267 Op. cit., p. 72.
(2016) is of the opinion that the law that Paul opposed in Galatians was not the Jewish Torah but the law enforced by and embodied in the Roman Empire. Paul’s idea that “being in Christ” invalidated the typical dichotomies of human existence was unfortunately soon lost and the notion of solidarity across all borders should again become a central notion in our time. On the basis of 5:2–4, Daniel H. Fletcher
278268 C. Zoccali, “What’s the Problem with the Law? Jews, Gentiles, and Covenant Identity in Galatians 3:10–12”, Neotestamentica 49:2 (2015), pp. 377–415.
https://doi.org/10.1353/neo.2016.0006
(2016) describes the opponents’ view of the law as “retrograde redemptive history”. They did not realise that Christ’s death inaugurated a new era characterised by his faithfulness and instead opted for a form of token-obedience to the law. In a study of Paul and the Gentile problem, Matthew Thiessen
279269 D. Hunn, “Galatians 3.10–12: Assumptions and Argumentation”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 37:3 (2015), pp. 253–266.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X14565571
Jan Lambrecht disagrees with Hunn. See: J. Lambrecht, In Search of Meaning: Collected Notes on the New Testament (2014–2017) (Balti: Scholars’ Press, 2017), pp. 443–448.
(2016) argues that Paul’s views in 4:21–31 (and on the law in Romans 2) fitted in well with the thinking of some Jews in his time who rejected the idea that Gentiles could become Jews by being circumcised and adopting the law. In this passage, Paul equates Gentiles opting for circumcision with Ishmael, and his opponents with Hagar. Ben C. Dunson
280270 D. Hunn, “Does the Law Condemn the World? Law, Sin, and Faith in Galatians 3,22–23”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 106:2 (2015), pp. 245–261.
https://doi.org/10.1515/znw-2015-0015
(2017) interprets the antithesis between faith and law in 3:12 as a view pertaining only to the question of how people are justified. This verse should thus not be interpreted as implying an absolute antithesis between the Mosaic covenant and grace.According to Paula Fredriksen
281271 J.A. Staples, “Altered Because of Transgressions? The ‘Law of Deeds’ in Gal 3,19a”, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 106:1 (2015), pp. 126–135.
https://doi.org/10.1515/znw-2015-0007
(2017), Paul opposed Judaising, but not Judaism as such. When he spoke against the observance of the law, he specifically referred to attempts to Judaise Gentile believers and to force them to be circumcised. He did not object to Jewish believers doing so. In a study of the development of Jewish identity from Deuteronomy to Paul, John J. Collins
282272 Op. cit., p. 127.
(2017) stresses Paul’s commitment to the ethical dimension of the law rather than issues such as the keeping of the Sabbath and circumcision. Furthermore, for Paul the ethical dimension of the law became effective only through faith in Christ. Thomas Johann Bauer
283273 T. Witulski, “Das Konzept des νόμος im Vierten Buch der Makkabäer und im Galaterbrief”, in: C. Breytenbach (ed.), Paul’s Graeco-Roman Context (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 277, Leuven/Paris/Bristol CT: Peeters, 2015), pp. 545–562.
(2017) discusses Paul’s view of Moses. From Paul’s letters it is clear that he only mentions Moses incidentally, and only when his argument requires it. In 3:19–25, Paul downplays Moses’s status because he wants his readers not to keep on practising the law. According to Gilbert Meilaender
284274 G. Baltes, “‘Freiheit vom Gesetz’ – Eine paulinische Formel? Paulus zwischen jüdischem Gesetz und christlicher Freiheit”, in: A.D. Baum, D. Häusser and E.L. Rehfeld (eds.), Der jüdische Messias: Jesus und sein jüdischer Apostel Paulus (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.425, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016), pp. 265–314.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-153873-5
(2018), Paul warns believers in Galatians that they should not rely on the works of the law, but this does not mean that they can ignore the moral side of the law, since it should still shape their conduct. Karl Olav Sandnes
285275 C. Heil, “‘Angeordnet durch Engel durch die Hand eines Mittlers’ (Gal 3,19): Das paulinische Konzept von der Vermittlung der Tora”, in: A. Taschl-Erber and I. Fischer (eds.), Vermittelte Gegenwart: Konzeptionen der Gottespräsenz von der Zeit des Zweiten Tempels bis Anfang des 2. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.367, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016), pp. 229–243.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-154725-6
(2018) uses mirror-reading to determine what Paul’s opponents objected to with regard to his view of the law and why they did so. Sandnes identifies three embedded dictas in Galatians, reflecting the views of the opponents: 2:17 (Paul’s teaching about the law and sin is absurd), 3:21 (Paul believed that the law was opposed to the promises of God) and 5:11 (Paul will eventually realise that the Abraham story that he bases his views on includes circumcision). In a discussion of Paul’s views of the Torah in Galatians, Martin Meiser
286276 G.E. Gilthvedt, Dying and Deliverance: Searching Paul’s Law – Gospel Tension (Eugene OR: Wipf & Stock, 2016).
(2018) identifies the threefold role that it had before Christ came: announcing, cursing and restricting. After Christ had come, it began to function as a command to love. According to Meiser, the way in which Paul interprets the LXX in this regard was similar to what happened in other Jewish and Christian writings. Serge Ruzer
287277 B. Kahl, “Paul and the Law in Galatians: Roman Nomos or Jewish Torah?”, in: K.L. Bloomquist, C.L. Nessan and H.G. Ulrich (eds.), Radicalizing Reformation: Perspectives from North America (Die
(2018) examines Paul’s liberation language in Galatians against the broader Jewish tradition and argues that the way in which Paul linked the law to liberty suggests that he should be viewed as a witness to such a way of thinking in Judaism around the middle of the first century CE and attested in later rabbinic sources. According to Linda L. Belleville
288
Verlag, 2016), pp. 59–90. Reformation radikalisieren/Radicalizing Reformation 6, Zürich: LIT
(2019), Paul’s use of the Sinai-mediator tradition in 3:19–20 does not indicate the inferiority of the law (as many scholars assume). Instead, it highlights the weakness of Israel. In a study of the condemning and enslaving power of the law, Bryan Blazosky
289278 D.H. Fletcher, “Retrograde Redemptive History: The Law in Galatians 5:2–4”, Restoration Quarterly 58:1 (2016), pp. 23–38.
(2019) points out that Paul thought that both Gentile and Jewish believers were cursed by the law and had to be rescued from its power. The notion of universal accountability to the law was in line with what is found in some Jewish writings, but the most important difference is that he drew the line between people belonging to Christ and those that did not belong to him. Paul’s negative view of the law was also not shared by other Second Temple Jewish writings. Charles E. Cruise
290279 M. Thiessen, Paul and the Gentile Problem (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 73–101.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190271756.001.0001
(2019) develops a typology for detecting hyperbole which is then used to argue that the texts in Galatians creating the impression that Paul is ambivalent about the role of the Jewish law are hyperbolic and should thus not be taken as an indication of a negative view of the law. Paul’s view of the law was quite positive. Néstor O. Míguez
291280 B.C. Dunson, “‘The Law Evidently Is Not Contrary to Faith’: Galatians and The Republication of the Covenant of Works”, Westminster Theological Journal 79:2 (2017), pp. 243–266.
(2019) approaches Paul’s view of liberty and justice in Romans and Galatians from the perspective of the notion of “device” (Foucault and Agamben). For Paul the law as a “device” was replaced by a disposition according to which believers were called to freedom in Christ, meant to make them instruments of justice under the mandate of love. This implies that the law of the market should be replaced by a sensitivity for vulnerable people. One of the passages that Kent L. Yinger
292281 P. Fredriksen, Paul: The Pagans’ Apostle (New Haven CT/London: Yale University Press, 2017).
(2019) discusses in a study of perfection in the Biblical tradition is 3:10. According to Yinger, Paul’s aim is to prove that Gentile believers do not have to adopt a Jewish lifestyle in order to be part of God’s people. He is not interested in showing that all people are sinners because they cannot keep the law perfectly. Dae-Joo Lee
293282 J.J. Collins, The Invention of Judaism: Torah and Jewish Identity from Deuteronomy to Paul (Taubman Lectures in Jewish Studies 7, Oakland CA: University of California Press, 2017), pp. 159–181.
https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520294110.001.0001
(2020) focuses on the concept “liberty” in Galatians. The letter shows that Paul understands it as freedom from circumcision as well as from keeping the law, and that he uses various strategies in the letter in order to safeguard the freedom of the readers.
12.2 The expression “works of the law”
Denis R. Lindsay
294283 T.J. Bauer, “‘... angeordnet durch die Engel mit Hilfe eines Mittlers’ (Gal 3,19): Gestalt und Rolle des Mose in den Briefen des Paulus”, in: M. Sommer, E. Eynikel, V. Niederhofer and E. Hernitscheck (eds.), Mosebilder: Gedanken zur Rezeption einer literarischen Figur in Frühjudentum, frühen Christentum und der römisch-hellenistischen Literatur (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.390, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), pp. 211–252.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155809-2
(2000) draws attention to three parallel expressions in 2:16–3:5: “faith of Christ”, “works of the law” and “hearing of faith”. Lindsay is of the opinion that the genitive should be interpreted in all three instances as an attributive genitive/genitive of quality, which means that “faith of Christ” should be interpreted as faith pertaining solely to Christ, faith that is consistent with Christ. Martin G. Abegg Jr.
295284 G. Meilaender, “The Decalogue as the Law of Christ”, Pro Ecclesia 27:3 (2018), pp. 338–349.
https://doi.org/10.1177/106385121802700312
(2001) discusses the expression “works of the law” in 4QMMT and Paul, arguing that, although it is clear that Paul did not know 4QMMT, the theological issue reflected in 4QMMT in this regard apparently survived intact until the first century CE. Robert Keith Rapa
296285 K.O. Sandnes, Paul Perceived: An Interactionist Perspective on Paul and the Law (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.412, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018), pp. 55–91.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-156102-3
(2001) interprets the expression “works of the law” as referring to legalistic observances of the Jewish law, which were mistakenly believed by Paul’s opponents to be salvific. William Dumbrell
297286 M. Meiser, “Torah in Galatians: The Significance of the Reception of the Septuagint”, in: J. Høgenhaven, J.T. Nielsen and H. Omerzu (eds.), Rewriting and Reception in and of the Bible (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.396, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018), pp. 181–201.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155439-1
(2001) highlights a reluctance amongst New Testament scholars to give the covenant its due. According to Dumbrell, the term “works of the law” in 2:14–21 refers to the Sinai covenant and one should understand Paul as claiming that acceptance of the new covenant is only possible through faith in Christ. In dialogue with recent studies on the term “works of the law”, Michael Bachmann
298287 S. Ruzer, “Paul as an Early Witness to the Jewish Notion of Liberation-through-Torah”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 41:1 (2018), pp. 82–94.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064x18788980
(2005) opts for interpreting it as a reference to halakhic regulations. Paul believed that salvation was based on the Christ-event and not on the regulations of the law. William D. Barrick
299288 L.L. Belleville, “The Sinai-μεσίτης Tradition in Galatians 3:19–20”, in: S.E. Porter and C.D. Land (eds.), Paul and Scripture (Pauline Studies 10, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2019), pp. 325–334.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391512_016
(2005) rejects the interpretation of “works of the law” by proponents of the New Perspective. Instead, Barrick understands the concept as referring to human deeds meant to earn merit with God. Hansoo Lee
300289 B. Blazosky, The Law’s Universal Condemning and Enslaving Power: Reading Paul, the Old Testament, and Second Temple Jewish Literature (Bulletin for Biblical Research Supplements 24, University Park PA: Eisenbrauns, 2019).
(2006) interprets the expression “works of the law” as referring to the commandments of the law and argues that 3:10 states that all people continuing to base their salvation on the law are under a curse. James D.G. Dunn and James H. Charlesworth
301290 C.E. Cruise, Writing on the Edge: Paul’s Use of Hyperbole in Galatians (Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2019).
(2006) detect a striking link between the expression “some works of Torah” in 4QMMT and the Letter to the Galatians, indicating that the vocabulary that Paul uses and his way of thinking about the law were also prevalent among other Jews. Duk-Joong Kim
302291 N.O. Míguez, “Entre la Libertad y la Justicia: De Gálatas a Romanos”, Revista Bíblica 81:1/2 (2019), pp. 137–153.
https://doi.org/10.47182/rb.81.n-201932
(2007) points out that the concept “works of the law” in 4QMMT presupposes the notion of covenantal nomism and that this seems to be similar to what Paul has in mind when using this term in Galatians. Thus, it might be the case that in Galatians Paul made use of an existing polemical argument for his own purposes. Jacqueline C.R. de Roo
303292 K.L. Yinger, God and Human Wholeness: Perfection in Biblical and Theological tradition (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2019), pp. 93–102.
(2007) compares the expression “works of the law” at Qumran and in Paul. According to De Roo, at Qumran, it refers to deeds that were done in obedience to God’s law, which were regarded as a means of atonement. In Galatians, however, “works of the law” refers to the works of Abraham, which could not bring about atonement. Paul L. Owen
304293 D.J. Lee, “Paul’s Protection of ‘the Freedom’ in the Galatian Church”, 신학논단 101 (2020), pp. 179–208.
https://doi.org/10.17301/tf.2020.09.101.179
(2007) interprets the genitive (“works of the law”) in Romans and Galatians as a subjective genitive, i.e., as referring to the works brought about by the law (which failed to produce righteousness). Michael Bachmann
305294 D.R. Lindsay, “Works of Law, Hearing of Faith and πίστις Χριστοῦ in Galatians 2:16–3:5”, Stone-Campbell Journal 3:1 (2000), pp. 79–88.
(2009) disagrees with explanations of “works of the law” as referring to good deeds of people (as Hofius proposes) and instead understands it as referring to halakhot (a set of regulations/boundary markers). Bachmann supports this choice by various texts: Revelation 2:26, T. Levi 19:1–2, 4QMMT C27 and y. Qid 63d. In another study, Bachmann
306295 M.G. Abegg Jr., “4QMMT, Paul, and ‘Works of the Law’”, in: P. Flint (ed.), The Bible at Qumran: Text, Shape and Interpretation (Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Literature, Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2001), pp. 203–216.
(2010) focuses on the genitive expression “works of the law”, again arguing that it is to be interpreted as referring to halakhot distinguishing Jews from Gentiles. Barry F. Parker
307296 R.K. Rapa, The Meaning of “Works of the Law” in Galatians and Romans (Studies in Biblical Literature 31, New York NY: Peter Lang, 2001).
(2013) reads the expression “works of the law” against the background of the Jewish settlement in Asia Minor, suggesting that Paul adapted Anatolian notions to serve his own polemic. The expression referred to particular works of the law practised by his opponents and covered (different) practices in Judaism and paganism. Todd Scacewater
308297 W. Dumbrell, “Galatians 2:14–21: A New Covenant Perspective”, European Journal of Theology 10:2 (2001), pp. 105–116.
(2013) disagrees with the way in which proponents of the New Perspective on Paul interpret the expression “works of the law”. According to Scacewater, it is clear from 2:11–21 that it refers to the commandments of the law which were performed in order to be justified. Gaspar de Souza
309298 M. Bachmann, “Keil oder Mikroskop? Zur jüngeren Diskussion um den Ausdruck ‘Werke des Gesetzes’”, in: M. Bachmann and J. Woyke (eds.), Lutherische und Neue Paulusperspektive: Beiträge zu einem Schlüsselproblem der gegenwärtigen exegetischen Diskussion (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.182, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), pp. 69–134.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157299-9
Also available in: M. Bachmann, Von Paulus zur Apokalypse – und weiter: Exegetische und rezeptionsgeschichtliche Studien zum Neuen Testament (samt englischsprachigen Summaries) (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus/Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 91, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), pp. 91–160. For a response and an attempt to offer a mediating position between Bachamann and Dunn, see: R.L. Brawley, “Meta-Ethics and the Role of Works of Law in Galatians”, in: M. Bachmann (ed.), Lutherische und Neue Paulusperspektive: Beiträge zu einem Schlüsselproblem der gegenwärtigen exegetischen Diskussion (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.182, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), pp. 135–159.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157299-9
(2014) believes that the traditional interpretation of the term “works of the law” in 2:16 is correct and motivates this by means of a rhetorical and semantic interpretation of vv. 15–21. Le Chih Hsieh
310299 W.D. Barrick, “The New Perspective and ‘Works of the Law’ (Gal 2:16 and Rom 3:20)”, The Master’s Seminary Journal 16:2 (2005), pp. 277‑292.
(2018) interprets the genitive in “works of the law” as a subjective genitive and offers a new interpretation of the expression: it refers to the functions of the law or what the law characteristically does.
12.3 The expression “under the law” (3:23; 4:4–5, 21 and 5:18)
Joel Marcus
311300 H. Lee, “The Soteriology of Justification and the ‘Works of the Law’ in Galatians”, Shinshin Journal 5 (2006), pp. 89–135.
(2001) is of the opinion that the expression “under the law” was first used by Paul’s opponents and that he adapted it and used it against them. In-Gyu Hong
312301 J.D.G. Dunn and J.H. Charlesworth, “Qumran’s Some Works of Torah (4Q394–399 [4QMMT]) and Paul’s Galatians”, in: J.H. Charlesworth (ed.), The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls: 3. The Scrolls and Christian Origins: The Second Princeton Symposium on Judaism and Christian Origins (Waco TX: Baylor University Press, 2006), pp. 187–201.
(2002) interprets the expression “under the law” in Galatians as indicative of the enslaving power of the law, causing a lack of freedom and an inability to determine one’s own life. Todd A. Wilson
313302 D.-J. Kim, “m‛śy htwrh in 4QMMT and ἔργα νόμου in Galatians”, 신약연구 6:3 (2007), pp. 619–643.
(2005) believes that Paul used the expression as a rhetorical abbreviation for “under the curse of the law”. This implies that cursing plays a much more prominent role in Galatians than is generally recognised. In a study of the expression “under the law” in the Pauline epistles, James D.G. Dunn
314303 J.C.R. de Roo, “Works of the Law” at Qumran and in Paul (New Testament Monographs 13, Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2007).
(2013) points out that most of Paul’s fellow Jews might have regarded it a good position to find themselves in, but Paul had a different view. For him, it was similar to being “under the elements of the world” from which humankind had to be liberated in order to be “under grace” and be led by the Spirit.
12.4 The law as pedagogue (3:24–25)
J.C. O’Neill
315304 P.L. Owen, “The ‘Works of the Law’ in Romans and Galatians: A New Defense of the Subjective Genitive”, Journal of Biblical Literature 126:3 (2007), pp. 553–577.
https://doi.org/10.2307/27638452
(2001) discusses the references to pedagogues in 1 Corinthians 4:15 and Galatians 3:24–25 in terms of the ways in which Hellenistic and Jewish moralists used this family institution metaphorically. In 3:24, Paul uses it to depict the Jewish law as guiding Israel towards Christ and in 3:25 to portray the law as imprinting God’s law on people’s hearts. Sam Tsang
316305 M. Bachmann, “Was für Praktiken? Zur jüngsten Diskussion um die ἔργα νόμου”, New Testament Studies 55:1 (2009), pp. 35–54.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S002868850900006X
Also available in: M. Bachmann, Von Paulus zur Apokalypse – und weiter: Exegetische und rezeptionsgeschichtliche Studien zum Neuen Testament (samt englischsprachigen Summaries) (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus/Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 91, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), pp. 207–226.
(2005) discusses pedagogue as a servile metaphor in Galatians, arguing that Paul emphasises the temporary nature of the law. It had a function only until Christ came. Michael J. Smith
317306 M. Bachmann, “Bemerkungen zur Auslegung zweier Genitivverbindungen des Galaterbriefs: ‘Werke des Gesetzes’ (Gal 2,16 u.ö.) und ‘Israel Gottes’ (Gal 6,16)”, in: M. Bachmann and B. Kollmann (eds.), Umstrittener Galaterbrief: Studien zur Situierung und Theologie des Paulus-Schreibens (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 106, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2010), pp. 95–118. Also available in: M. Bachmann, Von Paulus zur Apokalypse – und weiter: Exegetische und rezeptionsgeschichtliche Studien zum Neuen Testament (samt englischsprachigen Summaries) (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus/Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 91, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), pp. 277–295.
(2006) discusses the cultural background of the pedagogue metaphor. According to Smith, Paul uses it in Galatians for two purposes: to highlight the temporary role of the law (that of a strict guardian) and to indicate that it prevented Israel from being contaminated by the religions of the Gentiles. According to Dieter Sänger
318307 B.F. Parker, “‘Works of the Law’ and the Jewish Settlement in Asia Minor”, Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism 9 (2013), pp. 42–96.
(2006), the argumentative style, antithetic structure and broader context within which the pedagogue metaphor is used in Galatians makes it clear that the law is not depicted in a positive sense. It is portrayed as a “Bewahrer” (guard) rather than as a “Bewacher” (guardian). Craig A. Evans
319308 T. Scacewater, “Galatians 2:11–21 and the Interpretive Context of ‘Works of the Law’”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 56:2 (2013), pp. 307–323.
(2008) cites examples from the Graeco-Roman world where pedagogues are depicted as protecting the financial and legal interests of minors. Evans also notes that Plutarch referred to the law as a pedagogue. Christian Laes
320309 G. de Souza, “Novamente as Obras da Lei: Gálatas 2.16”, Fides Reformata 19:2 (2014), pp. 77–93.
(2009) investigates 23 Greek inscriptions mentioning pedagogues and finds that they were usually slaves, that they typically stayed in contact with the children they tended to even after the children had reached adulthood, that some of these children in later life expressed their gratitude for the services rendered by the pedagogues, that pedagogues took pride in their jobs and that the term “pedagogue” eventually took on the meaning of instructor/teacher. Wilfried Eisele
321310 L.C. Hsieh, “The Works of the Law as the Functions of Law”, Sino-Christian Studies 25 (2018), pp. 7–45.
(2012) draws attention to the development of Paul’s notion of the pedagogue in the Pauline tradition. In 3:24–25, the law is depicted as a good educator that has fulfilled its role successfully. In later developments in the Pauline tradition, grace is also depicted as an educator (in Titus 2:11–14). Furthermore, Eisele discusses the similarities and differences in the way in which the law and grace are depicted as educators.
12.5 The expression “the law of Christ” in 6:2
Claude Pigeon
322311 J. Marcus, “‘Under the Law’: The Background of a Pauline Expression”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 63:1 (2001), pp. 72–83.
(2000) identifies three different ways in which the expression “the law of Christ” has been interpreted by scholars: the reinterpretation of the Mosaic law by Jesus Christ, a concept used by Paul’s opponents, and a reference to the commandment of love. Pigeon opts for interpreting it as a reference to mutual support, thus manifesting the love animating from the Christian community, a commandment addressed to all members. Michael Winger
323312 I.-G. Hong, “Being ‘under the Law’ in Galatians”, Evangelical Review of Theology 26:4 (2002), pp. 354–372.
(2000) believes that the expression does not refer to any legal instruction: instead, it is a metaphor denoting the lordship of Christ over believers, practically implying that their lives are taken over by the Spirit. One of the references that J. Louis Martyn
324313 T.A. Wilson, “‘Under Law’ in Galatians: A Pauline Theological Abbreviation”, Journal of Theological Studies 56:2 (2005), pp. 362–392.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/fli108
(2003) discusses in a study of Paul’s use of the term “law” plus the genitive is 6:2. According to Martyn, “Paul coins that expression in order to speak of the Law as it has been taken in hand by Christ, thus being delivered from its lethal alliance with Sin and made pertinent to the church’s daily life.”
325314 J.D.G. Dunn, “‘Under the Law’”, in: J. Krans, B.J. Lietaert Peerbolte, P.-B. Smit and A.W. Zwiep (eds.), Paul, John, and Apocalyptic Eschatology: Studies in Honour of Martinus C. de Boer (Novum Testamentum Supplements 149, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2013), pp. 48–60.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004250369_005
In a chapter on the expression “the law of Christ”, Graham Stanton
326315 J.C. O’Neill, “Pedagogues in the Pauline Corpus (1 Corinthians 4.15; Galatians 3.24, 25)”, Irish Biblical Studies 23:2 (2001), pp. 50–65.
(2004) investigates several interpretations of the expression over time. Stanton opts for understanding it as referring to the Mosaic law as it was interpreted by Christ having as its essence the love commandment and a willingness to carry the burdens of others. According to Femi Adeyemi
327316 S. Tsang, From Slaves to Sons: A New Rhetoric Analysis on Paul’s Slave Metaphors in His Letter to the Galatians (Studies in Biblical Literature 81, New York NY: Peter Lang, 2005).
(2006), the law that Jeremiah refers to in Jeremiah 33:33 should be identified with “the law of Christ” that Paul mentions in 1 Corinthians 9:21 and Galatians 6:2. Todd A. Wilson
328317 M.J. Smith, “The Role of the Pedagogue in Galatians”, Bibliotheca Sacra 163:650 (2006), pp. 197–214.
(2006) offers an overview of the shift in the way in which the expression has been interpreted. Formerly scholars tended to understand it as referring to something replacing the Mosaic law, but now more and more scholars prefer to link it directly to the Mosaic law. Wilson also points out the implications of this development. Jerome Murphy-O’Connor
329318 D. Sänger, “‘Das Gesetz ist unser παιδαγωγός geworden bis zu Christus’ (Gal 3,24)”, in: D. Sänger and M. Konradt (eds.), Das Gesetz im frühen Judentum und im Neuen Testament: Festschrift für Christoph Burchard zum 75. Geburtstag (Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments 57, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht/Academic Press Fribourg, 2006), pp. 236–260.
(2012) interprets the expression as meaning “the law which is Christ”, which makes sense if one keeps Philo’s notion of a person as “a living law” (a notion going back to ideas related to Hellenistic kingship) in mind. Francesco Bianchini
330319 C.A. Evans, “Paul and the Pagans”, in: S.E. Porter (ed.), Paul: Jew, Greek, and Roman (Pauline Studies 5, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2008), pp. 117–139.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004171596.i-370.49
(2013) detects a coherent development in Paul’s references to the law in 5:13–6:10 (5:14, 23 and 6:2), culminating in 6:2 where Paul claims that believers do not need the law of Moses anymore, since they have “the law of Christ” and are guided by the Spirit. Ho Hyung Cho
331320 C. Laes, “Pedagogues in Greek Inscriptions in Hellenistic and Roman Antiquity”, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 171 (2009), pp. 113‑122.
(2015) interprets the expression “the law of Christ” as referring to a principle created by Christ and not to any written laws, such as the Mosaic law or any other written law. In another study, Cho
332321 W. Eisele, “Vom ‘Zuchtmeister Gesetz’ zur ‘erziehenden Gnade’ (Gal 3,24f; Tit 2,11f): Religiöse Erziehung in der Paulustradition”, Biblische Zeitschrift 56:1 (2012), pp. 65–84.
https://doi.org/10.1163/25890468-056-01-90000004
(2019) offers an overview of the meaning of the expression in 6:2, Barnabas 2:6 and Ignatius’s Letter to the Magnesians and comes to the same conclusion: it refers to the principal characteristic of the new era that Christ inaugurated.
12.6 Wirkungsgeschichte
According to Mark Koehne
333322 C. Pigeon, “‘La loi du Christ’ en Galates 6,2”, Studies in Religion 29:4 (2000), pp. 425–438.
(2002), Aquinas interpreted the “works of the law” in 2:15–16 as referring to ceremonial precepts. He distinguished this from “doing the law” – part of the process of justification since it sprouted from faith acting in love. Khiok-khng Yeo
334323 M. Winger, “The Law of Christ”, New Testament Studies 46:4 (2000), pp. 537–546.
(2005) compares li in The Analects and the law in Galatians, drawing out the implications of li and the law for contemporary society. Yeo suggests that the goal of living by li and the law is the common good. James W. Thompson
335324 J.L. Martyn, “Nomos Plus Genitive Noun in Paul: The History of God’s Law”, in: J.T. Fitzgerald, T.H. Olbricht and L.M. White (eds.), Early Christianity and Classical Culture: Comparative Studies in Honor of Abraham J. Malherbe (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 110, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2003), pp. 575–587.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047402190_028
(2008) critically discusses the way in which the law is perceived in the Stone-Campbell movement in the light of Paul’s views of the law (as, amongst other things, reflected in Galatians). Thompson believes that Campbell and those who followed him did not realise the abiding significance of the law. In the light of criticism raised by the New Perspective on Paul against the way in which the Reformed tradition interpreted Paul, Stephen Chester
336325 Op. cit., p. 583.
(2008) discusses the way in which Erasmus and the Reformers interpreted 2:16, in particular the expression “works of the law”, the notion of justification by faith and the expression “faith in Christ/the faithfulness of Christ”. Asger Chr. Højlund
337326 G. Stanton, Jesus and Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 110–123.
https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511616976
(2010) discusses Luther’s interpretation of Leviticus 18:5 in the light of his understanding of law and gospel in his commentary on Galatians. According to Højlund, for Luther there was a deep coherence between the two but also an important difference between them – a helpful perspective for our current discussions of the matter. S.J. Oh
338327 F. Adeyemi, “The New Covenant Law and the Law of Christ”, Bibliotheca Sacra 163:652 (2006), pp. 438–452.
(2010) compares the views of Calvin and Luther on the law in their commentaries on Galatians and argues that Luther focused more on the grace of God than Calvin did, and thus Luther gave a better explanation of Paul’s views. Michael Morson
339328 T.A. Wilson, “The Law of Christ and the Law of Moses: Reflections on a Recent Trend in Interpretation”, Currents in Biblical Research 5:1 (2006), pp. 123–144.
(2012) defends the interpretation of the expression “works of the law” by Luther and Calvin as “good works” against criticism by the New Perspective. Morson finds Luther and Calvin’s interpretation of the expression exegetically good and pastorally useful. According to Francois Wessels
340329 J. Murphy-O’Connor, “The Unwritten Law of Christ (Gal 6:2)”, Revue Biblique 119:2 (2012), pp. 213–231. Also available in English: J. Murphy-O’Connor, Keys to Galatians: Collected Essays (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2012), pp. 123–143.
(2013), Luther’s view of the situation in Galatia and Paul’s attempts at persuading the Galatians was not entirely correct. Nevertheless, Luther was not totally wrong about the law, since Paul’s warnings about the law as an identity marker could indeed be used to warn against other forms of misuse of the law.Pancha Wiguna Yahya
341330 F. Bianchini, “Il νόμος in Gal 5,13–6,10”, Biblica 94:1 (2013), pp. 47–62.
(2013) disagrees with James D.G. Dunn’s interpretation of the term “works of the law” in 2:16. According to Yahya, the context, literary style and historical setting show that it refers to obedience to the law. Sarah Hinlicky Wilson
342331 H.H. Cho, “The Study of the Meaning of Ό ΝΟΜΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ in Galatians 6:2”, 신약연구 14:4 (2015), pp. 516–543.
(2013) points out that Luther refers in two ways to the law in his 1531/35 commentary on Galatians, in a relational sense (the law as mediator between humankind and God) and in an instructive sense (the law as content, e.g., the decalogue as interpreted by Christ). According to Wilson, Lutherans wrongly tend to focus only on the first one. Jason A. Myers
343332 H.H. Cho, “ὁ νόμος τοῦ Χριστοῦ Reconsidered: A Fresh Look at Galatians 6:2, Barnabas 2:6, and Magnesians 2”, Canon & Culture 13:1 (2019), pp. 263–294.
(2013) discusses the dispute between Jerome and Antioch on the interpretation of the Antioch incident in order to show that there was at least one person in the Early Church that had a positive interpretation of Paul’s view of the law (and thus similar to the view of the New Perspective). Augustine emphasised the divine origin of the law and pointed out that Paul’s critique of the law should be understood within the context of a Gentile audience. Todd Scacewater
344333 M. Koehne, “Saint Thomas Aquinas: On ‘Works of the Law’ and ‘Faith of Christ’ in Galatians 2:15–16”, Scripture Bulletin 32:1 (2002), pp. 9–20.
(2013) disagrees with the way in which proponents of the New Perspective on Paul interpret the expression “works of the law”. According to Scacewater, it is clear from 2:11–21 that it refers to the commandments of the law which were performed in order to be justified. One of the issues that Matthew A. Tapie
345334 K.-K. Yeo, “Li and Law in the Analects and Galatians: A Chinese Christian Understanding of Ritual and Property”, The Asia Journal of Theology 19:2 (2005), pp. 309–332. See also the reprint of a work originally published in 1998: K.-K. Yeo, What Has Jerusalem to do with Beijing? Biblical Interpretation from a Chinese Perspective (Contrapuntal Readings of the Bible in World Christianity 2, Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2018).
(2014) discusses in a book dedicated to Aquinas on Israel and the church, is Aquinas’s view of the law as can be deduced from his commentary on Galatians. Tapie summarises it as follows: “The ceremonial law as fulfilled, dead, and deadly”.
346335 J.W. Thompson, “Paul’s Doctrine of the Law and the Stone-Campbell Movement”, Restoration Quarterly 50:2 (2008), pp. 79–89.
Alain le Boulluec
347336 S. Chester, “When the Old Was New: Reformation Perspectives on Galatians 2:16”, The Expository Times 119:7 (2008), pp. 320–329.
https://
(2014) considers the way in which Theodore of Mopsuestia interprets the law in his commentary on Galatians: after sin had come, God gave humankind the law to avoid evil, but Christ liberated them from this situation and brought the hope of a life to come when the law would not be necessary anymore. Marie-Odile Boulnois
348
doi.org/10.1177/0014524608091090
(2014) explains how Theodoret of Cyrus’s notion of a symphonia between the Father and the Son, between Paul and the other apostles, and between the law (coming from God) and the gospel is developed in Theodoret’s commentary on Galatians. For Theodoret, it was very important that Christ was the end of the law and that believers should thus live according to faith. Aihe Zheng
349337 A.C. Højlund, “‘The One Who Does Them Shall Live by Them’: Luther’s Interpretation of Leviticus 18:5 in the Light of His Understanding of Law and Gospel in His Commentary on Galatians”, in: T. Johansson, R. Kolb and J.A. Steiger (eds.), Hermeneutica Sacra: Studien zur Auslegung der Heiligen Schrift im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert/Studies of the Interpretation of Holy Scripture in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (Historia Hermeneutica: Series Studia 9, Berlin/New York NY: De Gruyter, 2010), pp. 111–130.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110236873.111
(2016) investigates Luther’s lectures on Galatians and Genesis (1535–1545) to determine what he taught about pastoral issues. According to Zheng, Luther used his views on law and gospel to encourage his students to live out their vocations faithfully. Jacobus de Koning
350338 S.J. Oh, “A Comparison of the Views on the Law between Luther and Calvin in Their Commentaries on Galatians”, Korean New Testament Studies 17:3 (2010), pp. 657–709.
(2017) identifies 6:2 as the guideline for Christian ethics in the new dispensation. According to it, the law is replaced by the crucified Christ. Dexter S. Maben
351339 M. Morson, “Reformed, Lutheran, and ‘New Perspective’: A Dialogue between Traditions Regarding the Interpretation of ‘Works of the Law’ in Galatians”, Canadian Theological Review 1:2 (2012), pp. 61–67.
(2017) believes that the Lutheran Paul has to be “liberated”. This can be done by understanding the law by means of social dominance theory, focusing on the social dimension of the law. Maben illustrates this by an interpretation of 3:6–20. Shabbir Akhtar
352340 F. Wessels, “Did Luther Get It Altogether Wrong? Luther’s Interpretation of the Function of the Mosaic Law in Galatians”, Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif 54:5 (2013), pp. 321–330.
https://doi.org/10.5952/54-0-367
(2018) offers a Muslim perspective on Galatians, in particular challenging Paul’s claim that Christ liberates one from religious law. According to Edith M. Humphrey
353341 P.W. Yahya, “Sebuah Kritik terhadap Pandangan James D.G. Dunn tentang ‘Melakukan Hukum Taurat’ dalam Galatia 2:16”, Veritas: Jurnal Teologi dan Pelayanan 14:1 (2013), pp. 107–126.
https://doi.org/10.36421/veritas.v14i1.270
(2018), it is clear from Chrysostom’s exegesis of Galatians that he had a narrow interpretation of the concept “works of the law” but interpreted the concept “righteousness of God” in a flexible way. Luther, on the other hand, had a very specific interpretation of “righteousness of God”, but a broad view of “works of the law”.
13. Soteriology
As happened in the previous section, a distinction may be made between studies of a more general nature and studies focusing on particular aspects that drew much interest.
13.1 General studies
According to Peder Borgen
354342 S.H. Wilson, “The Law of God”, Lutheran Quarterly 27:4 (2013), pp. 373‑398.
(2000), Paul’s main point in 3:1–14 is:
“[T]he fact that Christ Jesus was crucified as a cursed criminal made it evident that those who relied upon this Sinaitic law were themselves under a curse. Thus, Christ’s death marked the end of the Sinaitic law and the beginning of the new era when the blessing of Abraham would come to the Gentiles and ‘we’ could receive the promise of the Spirit”.
355343 J.A. Myers, “Law, Lies and Letter Writing: An Analysis of Jerome and Augustine on the Antioch Incident (Galatians 2:11–14)”, Scottish Journal of Theology 66:2 (2013), pp. 127–139.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0036930613000069
C. Marvin Pate
356344 T. Scacewater, “Galatians 2:11–21 and the Interpretive Context of ‘Works of the Law’”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 56:2 (2013), pp. 307–323.
(2000) maintains that Paul viewed Christ as the Wisdom of God who had removed the Deuteronomic curses through his death on the cross. The blessings of the covenant thus rested on believers whereas the curses of the covenant remained on those who try to keep the law. Frank J. Matera
357345 M.A. Tapie, Aquinas on Israel and the Church: The Question of Supersessionism in the Theology of Thomas Aquinas (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2014), pp. 109–135.
(2000) explains how Paul developed his views on justification as a result of a twofold problem in the congregations in Galatians: a theological problem (Does righteousness depend on something else in addition to the Christ event?) and a social problem (May Gentile believers share table fellowship with Jewish Christians without adopting Jewish ways?). Matera also works out the implications of Paul’s views in the letter for ecumenical dialogue. David Abernathy
358346 Op. cit., p. 109.
(2001) criticises James D.G. Dunn’s view of justification by faith. Although Dunn correctly points out that Paul had a problem with covenant markers, he does not consider Paul’s view that it is impossible for humans to keep the law. Dunn also misses the fact that Paul was converted from the grip of sin and his sinful nature and not only from a mistaken zeal for the law.David Brondos
359347 A. le Boulluec, “Les temps du régime de la loi et la justification par la foi selon Théodore de Mopsueste dans son Commentaire sur l’Épître aux Galates”, in: I. Bochet and M. Fédou (eds.), L’exégèse patristique de l’Épître aux Galates (Collection des Études Augustiniennes: Série Antiquité 197, Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, 2014), pp. 33‑58.
(2001) summarises Paul’s views about redemption in 3:13 as follows: “[B]y being obedient unto death in seeking the redemption of others, Christ attained that redemption once for all when God responded by raising him, since now exalted in power, he is certain to redeem God’s people from the law’s curse when he comes again.”
360348 M.-O. Boulnois, “De la symphonie trinitaire à la symphonie apostolique: La loi et l’évangile dans l’exégèse de l’Épître aux Galates chez Théodoret de Cyr”, in: I. Bochet and M. Fédou (eds.), L’exégèse patristique de l’Épître aux Galates (Collection des Études Augustiniennes: Série Antiquité 197, Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, 2014), pp. 59–81.
Luc de Saeger
361349 A. Zheng, Law and Gospel in Martin Luther’s Pastoral Teachings as Seen in His Lecture Notes: Finding Guidance in Genesis and Galatians to Serve the Household of God (Bern: Peter Lang, 2016).
https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-06912-9/1
(2001) discusses the similarities and differences between the use of the expression “for our sins” in 1:4a and 1 Corinthians 15:3b. De Saeger suggests that the expression is used in 1 Corinthians in a context referring to the future whereas the emphasis in Galatians falls on present liberation. According to Basil S. Davis
362350 J. de Koning, “Die Riglyn vir Christen Etiek: Galasiërs 6:2 onder die Loep”, In die Skriflig 51:1 (2017), pp. 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ids.v51i1.2205
(2002), Paul’s reference to Christ becoming a curse (3:13) contains an allusion to Roman devotio, i.e., a human sacrifice who died in order to break a curse. Patrick Mulemi
363351 D.S. Maben, “‘Why Then the Law?’ Pauline Ecclesiology and Interfaith Relations”, Bangalore Theological Forum 49:1 (2017), pp. 102–116.
(2003) is of the opinion that 2:15–16 and 5:5–6 do not contradict each other. Both indicate that justification come through faith and not through the law. Works are to be performed in faith working through love. Jouette M. Bassler
364352 S. Akhtar, The New Testament in Muslim Eyes: Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (Routledge Reading the Bible in Islamic Contexts 2, London/New York NY: Routledge, 2018).
(2003) draws attention to the fact that Paul’s view of grace was not static. Before encountering the Risen Christ, his view of grace conformed to that of contemporary Judaism, but then the cross became the new locus of grace for him. The problems in Galatia let him discover the fundamental inclusive nature of grace. Beatriz Augusta de Campos Sampaio
365353 E.M. Humphrey, “Meditating Upon God’s Righteousness with Chrysostom (and Luther)”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 29–43. In his response to Humphrey’s contribution (in the same volume), Peter Leithart suggests that Luther’s interpretation of the two concepts might perhaps not be as different from that of Chrysostom as Humphrey believes. See: P.J. Leithart, “Response: Galatians Five Hundred Years Later”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 63–71.
(2004) discusses the theme of inheritance in the Old Testament and Graeco-Roman law as background for an interpretation of the concept “heir” in 4:1–7 and in Romans 8:17. De Campos Sampaio emphasises the importance of the notion “the fullness of time” and the trinitarian perspective in order to grasp Paul’s use of the concept. Moisés Silva
366354 P. Borgen, “Openly Portrayed as Crucified: Some Observations on Gal 3:1–14”, in: D.G. Horrell and C.M. Tuckett (eds.), Christology, Controversy, and Community: New Testament Essays in Honour of David R. Catchpole (Novum Testamentum Supplements 99, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2000), pp. 345–353.
(2004) maintains that if one wishes to explain Paul’s view of justification in Galatians, one cannot escape the fact that there is a contrast between “works of the law” and faith in 2:15–3:25. Silva offers several arguments why one cannot restrict “works of the law” to identity markers and why it is best to understand the expression “faith of Christ” as an objective genitive. Devorah Steinmetz
367355 Op. cit., p. 351.
(2005) compares Paul’s views on justification by deeds with the conclusion of Sanhedrin-Makkot and points out that although there is a huge difference in the way in which the two respond to the question of how one can live before God if one does not keep the law perfectly, there are also conspicuous similarities between the arguments used to offer an answer to the problem. Wiard Popkes
368356 C.M. Pate, The Reverse of the Curse: Paul, Wisdom, and the Law (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.114, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157167-1
(2005) compares justification in 2:15–21 and James 2:21–25 and finds that there are remarkable parallels between the two, most importantly the fact that both texts depict justification primarily in terms of personal relationships. Heung-Shik Choi
369357 F.J. Matera, “Galatians and the Development of Paul’s Teaching on Justification”, Word & World 20:3 (2000), pp. 239–248.
(2005) highlights the importance of the antithesis between law and Spirit in Galatians for understanding Paul’s view of justification. For Paul, the Spirit causes justification, conveys the blessing of Abraham and makes people children of God. Martinus C. de Boer
370358 D. Abernathy, “A Critique of James D.G. Dunn’s View of Justification by Faith as Opposed to the ‘Works of the Law’”, Lutheran Theological Journal 35:3 (2001), pp. 139–144.
(2005) outlines the way in which Paul interpreted a tradition of justification in 2:15–21. Paul dissociated justification from the “works of the law” and associated it fully with the faith of Jesus Christ. In a contribution on the Pauline and Petrine sola fide in Galatians 2, Simon J. Gathercole
371359 D. Brondos, “The Cross and the Curse: Galatians 3.13 and Paul’s Doctrine of Redemption”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 23:81 (2001), pp. 3–32.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0102308101
(2005) tries to determine the level of theological agreement between Peter, Paul and James on the one hand and “the ones of the circumcision” on the other hand. For Gathercole, it is important to realise that the “pillars” did not insist that Titus had to be circumcised and that they supported the mission under the Gentiles. According to this pericope, it also seems as if Titus had shared meals and the eucharist with the believers in Jerusalem. Scott Shauf
372360 Op. cit., p. 32.
(2006) argues that 2:20 forms part of Paul’s argument on justification in 2:15–21. It concludes Paul’s response to the objection in 2:17 and provides the basis for his claim about the real source of righteousness in 2:21. Thomas Söding
373361 L. de Saeger, “‘Für unsere Sünden’: 1 Kor 15,3b und Gal 1,4a im exegetischen Vergleich”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 77:1 (2001), pp. 169–191.
https://doi.org/10.2143/etl.77.1.567
(2006) provides an overview of the conflicting interpretations of Paul’s views on justification in Galatians through the centuries and then goes on to outline the critical importance of this issue in determining the truth of the gospel. According to Yun-Gyung Kwon
374362 B.S. Davis, Christ as Devotio: The Argument of Galatians 3:1–14 (Lanham MD: University Press of America, 2002).
(2007), in Galatians (unlike Romans), justification is a future event. Only faith gives one access to the Spirit – an event that enables one to maintain a life befitting people who await (future) justification. Young Chul Whan
375363 P. Mulemi, “A Synopsis of the Pauline Theology on Justification: Galatians 2:15–16 and 5:5–6”, Hekima Review 30 (2003), pp. 61–67.
(2007) is of the opinion that the theological problem that Paul attends to in Galatians is the notion that people are justified by the law (the view of the opponents). Paul’s view is that people are only justified by faith in Christ. Jae Won Lee
376364 J.M. Bassler, “Grace: Probing the Limits”, Interpretation 57:1 (2003), pp. 24–33.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002096430005700104
(2007) offers an emancipatory reading of justification in Galatians 1 and 2: Paul was primarily concerned about equal relations between Gentiles and Jews within the Messianic community and the fact that justification brought about a new relationship between them in Christ. Peter Chidolue Onwuka
377365 B.A. de Campos Sampaio, “La Nozione di ‘kleronomos’ nelle Lettere Paoline ai Romani e ai Galati”, Rivista Biblica 52:1 (2004), pp. 11–39.
(2007) discusses Paul’s views of the law, redemption and freedom in 3:10–14 and in Romans 7:1–6. In Galatians 3:10–14, Paul argues that the law is not God’s way to righteousness. It only stipulates what should be done but does not provide strength to achieve this and the only solution to this situation is the redemption by Christ. John Piper
378366 M. Silva, “Faith versus Works of Law in Galatians”, in: D.A. Carson, P.T. O’Brien and M.A. Seifrid (eds.), Justification and Variegated Nomism: Volume II: The Paradoxes of Paul (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.181, Tübingen/Grand Rapids MI: Mohr Siebeck/Baker Academic, 2004), pp. 217–248.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157089-6
(2007) disagrees with N.T. Wright’s interpretation of Paul’s view of justification and describes Wright’s views as dangerous for the church.Antonio Piñero
379367 D. Steinmetz, “Justification by Deed: The Conclusion of Sanhedrin-Makkot and Paul’s Rejection of Law”, Hebrew Union College Annual 76 (2005), pp. 133–187.
(2007) discusses Paul’s view of salvation as an example of the Hellenisation of Christianity. Paul changed the notion of a Jewish Messiah (with salvation restricted to Israel) to that of a universal Saviour with the conditions of salvation being changed for Gentiles, most notably by proclaiming justification by faith. In a discussion of the meaning of the death of Jesus according to 3:6–14, Michael Theobald
380368 W. Popkes, “Two Interpretations of ‘Justification’ in the New Testament: Reflections on Galatians 2:15–21 and James 2:21–25”, Studia Theologica 59:2 (2005), pp. 129–146.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00393380500339560
(2009) stresses the importance of the notion of substitution (“Stellvertretung”). According to Galatians, Jesus suffered on behalf of us. He gave himself pro nobis – an act embodying God’s love for humankind. Trevor J. Burke
381369 H.-S. Choi, “The Law and the Spirit in Galatians: Antithetical Basis of Justification”, 한국기독교신학논총 42:1 (2005), pp. 75–92.
(2008) argues that Paul’s adoption metaphor (used in 4:1–7 and in Romans 8) is best understood against the context of the ancient Roman familia, thus depicting salvation as an action by the Divine Family: the Father (paterfamilias) initiates salvation, it happens through Jesus, God’s Son, and the Spirit carries out the process of resocialisation. N.T. Wright
382370 M.C. de Boer, “Paul’s Use and Interpretation of a Justification Tradition in Galatians 2.15–21”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 28:2 (2005), pp. 189–216.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X05060096
(2009) responds to Piper (see above) and other critics in detail. In the case of Galatians, Wright again argues for a covenantal reading of Chapters 2 to 4. Furthermore, Wright links Paul’s criticism of the law to the fact that people break the law and that it divides Gentiles from Jews. This situation is rectified by “the faith of Christ”, referring to Jesus faithfully giving his life on the cross. Douglas A. Campbell
383371 S.J. Gathercole, “The Petrine and Pauline sola fide in Galatians 2”, in: M. Bachmann and J. Woyke (eds.), Lutherische und Neue Paulusperspektive: Beiträge zu einem Schlüsselproblem der gegenwärtigen exegetischen Diskussion (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.182, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), pp. 309–327.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157299-9
(2009) is highly critical of the dominant view of justification, since it is based on a misreading of Paul’s letters. According to Campbell, Paul does not have a forensic notion of justification, but rather a participatory and liberative view of justification. Through Christ’s death, God delivered enslaved humankind from the power of sin. Brigitte Kahl
384372 S. Shauf, “Galatians 2.20 in Context”, New Testament Studies 52:1 (2006), pp. 86–101.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688506000051
(2011) shows how Galatians, and, in particular, the notion of justification, has been colonised by various Western scholars and, instead, prefers to focus on the way in which the letter overturns Self/“Other” binaries and thus can help one to reimagine Galatian ethnicity. Hung Sik Choi
385373 T. Söding, “Die Rechtfertigungstheologie des Galaterbriefes im Streit der Interpretationen”, Theologische Literaturzeitung 131:10 (2006), pp. 1003–1020.
(2011) describes Paul’s reason for opposing his opponents as “the gospel of the cross”. For Paul, the cross is the only authentic basis for salvation. It breaks down barriers between Gentiles and Jews and unites people in Christ. Douglas J. Moo
386374 Y.-G. Kwon, “Faith and Law: Justification in Galatians”, 신약연구 6:1 (2007), pp. 51–82.
(2011) offers an overview of justification in Galatians, arguing that Paul’s view of justification confirms the way in which the Reformation understood it. Humankind enters into and maintains a relationship with God by faith alone. Albert Vanhoye
387375 Y.C. Whang, “A Pastoral Reading of Galatians: For Christian Freedom”, 신약연구 6:3 (2007), pp. 591–618.
(2011) describes Paul’s view of justification in Galatians as a creative exploration in the light of the paschal mystery of Christ who died for our sins. Justification is based on God’s free gift and more than a simple declaration of innocence, making the doing of the works of faith possible and necessary. John W. Taylor
388376 J.W. Lee, “Justification of Difference in Galatians”, in: R.L. Brawley (ed.), Character Ethics and the New Testament: Moral Dimensions of Scripture (Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox/London, 2007), pp. 191–208.
(2012) maintains that scholars tend to interpret the relationship between Gentiles and Jews in Galatians in a wrong way. According to 3:13–14 (as well as 3:25–26 and 4:4–7), a mutual independence exists. Gentiles receive the blessing of Abraham, since Jesus liberated the Jews from the curse of the law and Jewish believers receive the Spirit, since Gentiles received the blessings and became children of God. Jeffrey R. Reber
389377 P. Chidolue Onwuka, The Law, Redemption and Freedom in Christ: An Exegetical-Theological Study of Galatians 3,10–14 and Romans 7,1–6 (Tesi Gregoriana: Serie Teologia 156, Rome: Editrice Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 2007).
(2012) explains Paul’s view of justification by looking at 3:2 and 5. Reber thinks that the expression “from the message of faith” should be interpreted as an objective genitive, implying trust in God’s promises. The other option (“from the works of the law”) should be interpreted as a subjective genitive, implying trust in the performance of works of the law. John A. Davies
390378 J. Piper, The Future of Justification: A Response to N.T. Wright (Wheaton IL: Crossway Books, 2007).
(2012) discusses the three instances in which Paul writes that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything (Galatians 5:6, 6:15 and 1 Corinthians 7:19). Davies argues that although Paul’s indication of what does count differs in each case (faith made effective by love, new creation and obedience of God’s commandments), the dominant factor in all the passages is an emphasis on Christ’s role and believers’ identification with him. Monte A. Shanks
391379 A. Piñero, “On the Hellenization of Christianity: One Example: The Salvation of Gentiles in Paul”, in: A. Hilhorst, É. Puech and E. Tigchelaar (eds.), Flores Florentino: Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Early Jewish Studies in Honour of Florentino García Martínez (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 122, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2007), pp. 667–683.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004162921.i-836.214
(2012) emphasises the importance of taking the context of 5:2–4 into account when interpreting it. If that is done, one realises that Paul addresses Gentiles who are looking for justification by the law and he thus argues that true believers should not seek additional forms of justification after having received Christ. In a discussion of 2:15–21, Peter G. Kirchschläger
392380 M. Theobald, “‘Verflucht ist jeder, der am Holz hängt’: Die Deutung des Todes Jesu nach Gal 3,6–14”, Bibel und Kirche 64:3 (2009), pp. 158–165.
(2013) points out that there are similarities between the notions of justification through the law and through faith, such as that love plays a role in both instances. However, in the case of justification through faith one should also think of a “pneumatic conversion” (“pneumatische Umsetzung”
393381 T.J. Burke, “Adopted as Sons (ΥΙΟΘΕΣΙΑ): The Missing Piece in Pauline Soteriology”, in: S.E. Porter (ed.), Paul: Jew, Greek, and Roman (Pauline Studies 5, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2008), pp. 259–287.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004171596.i-370.76
). Chee-Chiew Lee
394382 N.T. Wright, Justification: God’s Plan & Paul’s Vision (Downers Grove IL: IVP Academic, 2009), pp. 111–140. For responses to Wright’s view,
(2013) disagrees with scholars who interpret the blessing to Abraham (3:14) as the Spirit. According to Lee, it refers to justification, and the reception of the Spirit is the proof that one has received justification.Based on etymology and the Hebrew Scriptures, Jose Enrique Aguilar Chiu
395
Christ”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 54:1 (2011), pp. 19–34, and T.D. Stegman, “Paul’s Use of dikaio-Terminology: Moving Beyond N.T. Wright’s Forensic Interpretation”, Theological Studies 72:3 (2011), pp. 496–524. see T.R. Schreiner, “Justification: The Saving Righteousness of God in
https://doi.org/10.1177/004056391107200302
(2013) identifies the basic meaning of the concept “righteousness” as conformity to something that has been indicated. This makes sense of the way in which Paul quotes Genesis 15:6 (as in Galatians 3:6), since faith implies conformity to God’s word. David E. Fredrickson (2013)
396383 D.A. Campbell, The Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Rereading of Justification in Paul (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2009). See also later: D.A. Campbell, “An Attempt to Be Understood: A Response to the Concerns of Matlock and Macaskill with The Deliverance of God”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 34:2 (2011), pp. 162–208,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X11424853
, and D.A. Campbell, “Beyond Justification in Paul: The Thesis of the Deliverance of God”, Scottish Journal of Theology 65:1 (2012), pp. 90–104.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S003693061100086X
For responses to Campbell’s views by a group of scholars, see C. Tilling (ed.), Beyond Old and New Perspectives on Paul: Reflections on the Work of Douglas Campbell (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2014).
offers a new interpretation of Paul’s notion of justification in Galatians and Philippians. Fredrickson emphasises an erotic sense of faith, bringing eros and justice together, thereby opening faith up to communion, sharing in everything. Mark P. Surburg
397384 B. Kahl, “Galatians and the ‘Orientalism’ of Justification by Faith: Paul among Jews and Muslims”, in: C.D. Stanley (ed.), The Colonized Apostle: Paul through Postcolonial Eyes (Paul in Critical Contexts, Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2011), pp. 206–222.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1hqdj44.19
(2013) disagrees with Martyn’s rendering of Paul’s justification language as “rectification”, offering arguments why it is better to opt for “justification”. Udo Schnelle
398385 H.S. Choi, “The Gospel of the Cross in Galatians”, 한국기독교신학논총 78:1 (2011), pp. 133–153.
(2013) highlights the development of Paul’s view of justification from Galatians to Romans. Paul solved the problem with the law by concentrating on love as its centre and aim while at the same time denying its soteriological function and abrogating its ritual prescriptions. In this way, he situated the Torah within a broader notion of the law, thus making it accessible for believers from different backgrounds. Beverly Roberts Gaventa
399386 D.J. Moo, “Justification in Galatians”, in: A.J. Köstenberger and R.W. Yarbrough (eds.), Understanding the Times: New Testament Studies in the 21st Century: Essays in Honor of D.A. Carson on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday (Wheaton IL: Crossway, 2011), pp. 160–195.
(2014) addresses the relationship between righteousness and participation (or mystical union) in Galatians. Gaventa describes this relationship by means of the expression “the singularity of the gospel”, with “singularity” to be taken in two ways: (1) there is only one gospel and (2) it has a single all-inclusive impact on the lives of believers. Jan Dušek
400387 A. Vanhoye, “La Giustificazione per Mezzo della Fede Secondo la Lettera ai Galati”, La Civiltà Cattolica 162:3870 (2011), pp. 457–466.
(2014) compares ḥesed (“loving kindness”) in the Community Rule and χάρις (“grace”) in Galatians and argues that the theological vocabulary of Galatians is very similar to that of the Community Rule (even though the aim of the two texts is quite different). This suggests that Paul and the author of the Community Rule drew from the same imaginary world in Palestinian Judaism, although Paul’s views on the matter were influenced drastically by the coming and death of Christ. In a contribution on the language of justification in 2:15–21 (and Romans 1:16–3:31), Stefano Romanello
401388 J.W. Taylor, “The Eschatological Interdependence of Jews and Gentiles in Galatians”, Tyndale Bulletin 63:2 (2012), pp. 291–316.
https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.29352
(2014) highlights the emphasis on the gratuitous nature of God’s actions on the behalf of humankind, noting that Paul’s language in this regard is theological (focusing on God). In order to grasp how he denotes the way in which believers receive justification, one has to study other Pauline notions, such as participation, union and walking in the Spirit.Norbert Jacoby
402389 J.R. Reber, “A New Perspective on Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in Galatians 3:2, 5”, Evangelical Journal 30:1 (2012), pp. 40–48.
(2014) criticises the one-dimensional way in which scholars interpret the relationship between faith and love in 5:6 by intuitively accepting that Paul had a single-cause view (“Ein-Ursachen-Lehre”) of events. Jacoby offers a different view. One should rather distinguish between two causes: a content-eidetic cause (“inhaltlich-eidetische ἀρχή”) – faith in Christ’s giving of himself (“Hingabeglauben”) – and a second, closely related, material-hyletic cause (“materiell-hyletische ἀρχή) – love. According to this verse, the two work closely together. Thomas Söding
403390 J.A. Davies, “What Does Count?”, The Reformed Theological Review 71:2 (2012), pp. 77–89.
(2014) reads Galatians as a letter of ecumenism, reflecting in detail on the way in which the Pauline theme of justification has been treated in different traditions. Söding also notes three dimensions in Paul’s view of justification that might be developed fruitfully in ecumenical dialogues: the personal aspect, the missionary dimension and the ecclesial impact. Jean-Noël Aletti
404391 M.A. Shanks, “Galatians 5:2–4 in Light of the Doctrine of Justification”, Bibliotheca Sacra 169 (2012), pp. 188–202.
(2015) offers a detailed discussion of the theme of justification by faith in Paul’s letters by approaching the letters from a rhetorical perspective. This approach is chosen because “justification” is a legal term and, furthermore, because a rhetorical approach helps one to interpret the letters within their original settings. Aletti stresses both the declarative and factitive sides of Paul’s view of justification. Michael Bachmann
405392 P.G. Kirchschläger, “Gesetz und Glaube in Gal 2,15–21”, Bibel und Liturgie 86:3 (2013), pp. 223–229.
(2015) raises the question as to whether “faith of Christ” and “works of the law” in 2:16 should be seen as being on two different levels or on the same level. Bachmann thinks that they should be taken as being on the same level. Both may be characterised as happening extra nos and both are linked to God, but being justified has its “place” in Christ, since one cannot be justified through the law. John M.G. Barclay
406393 Op. cit., p. 299. (Emphasis Kirchschläger.)
(2015) offers a detailed overview of the ways in which people understood gifts in the ancient world, emphasising in particular the widely held idea that they functioned as part of a reciprocal exchange. Barclay then maps out six ways in which the definition of a gift was “perfected”, and reads the Pauline letters in the light of this map. In the case of Galatians and Romans, Barclay stresses the incongruity between God as the giver and humankind as receivers of God’s gift, a situation creating a new loyalty on their part toward God and Christ. In a study of πίστις (Greek for “faith”) and fides (Latin for “faith”) in the Early Roman Empire and Christianity, Teresa Morgan
407394 C.-C. Lee, The Blessing of Abraham, the Spirit, and Justification in Galatians: Their Relationship and Significance for Understanding Paul’s Theology (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2013).
(2015) notes the following important development in Galatians: “For the first time that we know of, he [ = Paul] uses pistis to articulate the tripartite relationship between God, Christ, and humanity, putting Christ in the centre of a nexus of faithfulness, trustworthiness, and trust.”
408395 J.E. Aguilar Chiu, “The Basic Meaning of Righteousness and the Pauline Quote of Gn 15:6”, Estudios Bíblicos 71:2 (2013), pp. 235–269. Orrey McFarland
409396 D.E. Fredrickson, “The Justice of Faith”, Dialog: A Journal of Theology 52:2 (2013), pp. 121–127.
https://doi.org/10.1111/dial.12026
(2015) compares the views of Paul and Philo on God and grace. McFarland shows that both of them thought of God as lavishly generous but that they differed in the ways in which they depicted it. Philo links God’s grace primarily to creation, whereas Paul associates it with the Christ event. They also differed in the ways they conceived of the recipients of grace. Philo was of the view that God made people worthy to receive his grace whereas Paul did not think that anybody was worth of God’s grace. Hanna Stettler
410397 M.P. Surburg, “Rectify or Justify? A Response to J. Louis Martyn’s Interpretation of Paul’s Righteousness Language”, Concordia Theological Quarterly 77:1/2 (2013), pp. 45–77.
(2015) disagrees with the general view amongst scholars that Paul’s view of justification was unique and only developed late in his career. Stettler finds it in Paul’s early writings and argues that Jesus had already taught it earlier in the parable of the Pharisee and tax collector. Peter Cimala
411398 U. Schnelle, “Gibt es eine Entwicklung in der Rechtfertigungslehre vom Galater- zum Römerbrief?”, in: P.-G. Klumbies, D.S. du Toit, T. Jantsch and N. Neumann (eds.), Paulus – Werk und Wirkung: Festschrift für Andreas Lindemann zum 70. Geburtstag (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013), pp. 289–309.
(2015) draws attention to the variety of soteriological metaphors that Paul uses in Galatians, their coherence and the way in which they mutually interact. Cimala illustrates this in particular by means of the metaphors’ sonship and freedom. According to Cimala, looking for such a network of metaphors with its own inner logic is a better approach than trying to find one dominant metaphor or a centre in Paul’s theology. According to Peter J. Leithart
412399 B.R. Gaventa, “The Singularity of the Gospel Revisited”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 187–199.
(2016), God reconfigures the fallen situation in which humankind finds itself (being under “the elements of the world”) so that a new community is formed, operating in a different way. God does this by imparting to them a new nature. Leithart also works out the implications of this idea for missiology. David Lertis Matson
413400 J. Dušek, “Ḥesed dans la Règle de la Communauté et charis dans l’Épître de Paul aux Galates”, in: J.-S. Rey (ed.), The Dead Sea Scrolls and Pauline Literature (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 102, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2014), pp. 89–107.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004230071_007
(2016) draws attention to the fact that Paul does not use forgiveness language often, but rather speaks of justification. Matson is of the opinion that the notion of a justifying God exacting payment for sins caused Paul to put less emphasis on forgiveness. Shuji Ota
414401 S. Romanello, “Fede e operare credente: Le Articolazioni della Riflessione Paolina”, Teología 39:3 (2014), pp. 344–375.
(2016) draws attention to the foundational role that the faith of Abraham plays in Galatians 3 and works out the implications of this insight, in particular that Paul has a holistic view of faith. Fábio Vaz dos Santos
415402 N. Jacoby, “pístis di’ agápēs energouménē (Gal 5,6b): Versuch einer Interpretation”, Theologie und Philosophie 89:3 (2014), pp. 407–418.
(2016) points out that Paul uses the expression “in Christ” in various ways in his letter, but in essence it has to do with the new being and new identity that believers have in Christ through justification and sanctification. Simon Butticaz
416403 T. Söding, “Justification and Participation: Ecumenical Dimensions of Galatians”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 62–81.
(2016) approaches the notion of justification of faith from the perspective of ancient views on honour and shame. Paul’s views on justification opposed ancient notions on honour, both innate honour and acquired honour, since he had gained a new insight, namely the notion of the gift of God that was revealed to him. In another contribution, Butticaz
417404 J.-N. Aletti, Justification by Faith in the Letters of Saint Paul: Keys to Interpretation (Translated by Peggy Manning Meyer) (Analecta Biblica Studia 5, Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2015).
(2017) disagrees with scholars who regard Paul’s notion of justification in Galatians as a new theological development. Butticaz is of the view that Paul still makes use of the “word of the cross” that he used in the Corinthian correspondence. In a study of resurrection, restoration and rectification in Galatians, Andrew K. Boakye
418405 M. Bachmann, “Zwei Ebenen oder eher ein Niveau? Zur Entgegensetzung innerhalb von Gal 2,16a”, Biblische Zeitschrift 59:1 (2015), pp. 112–116.
(2017) finds that Paul thinks of crucifixion as a prelude to being revivified, with the death and resurrection of Christ as the primordial event. Having experienced the risen Christ himself, Paul viewed the rectification of other people as similarly being immersed in the Christ event. Michael J. Gorman
419406 J.M.G. Barclay, Paul and the Gift (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2015). See also earlier: J.M.G. Barclay, “Paul, the Gift and the Battle over Gentile Circumcision: Revisiting the Logic of Galatians”, Australian Biblical Review 58 (2010), pp. 36–56. And later: J.M.G. Barclay, Paul and the Power of Grace (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2020). For reactions to Barclay’s view, see R. Saarinen, “Perfections, Clarity, and Congruity”, Pro Ecclesia 28:2 (2019), pp. 114–119,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1063851219842401
, S. Fowl, “Can We Talk a Bit More? Appreciative Questions in Response to Paul and the Gift”, Pro Ecclesia 28:2 (2019), pp. 120–125,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1063851219842390
, D. Harink, “John Barclay’s Gift to Theology”, Pro Ecclesia 28:2 (2019), pp. 126–132,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1063851219842393
, and W. Hill, “Paul and the God of the Gift”, Pro Ecclesia 28:2 (2019), pp. 133–140,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1063851219842397
For Barclay’s response, see: J.M.G. Barclay, “Continuing the Conversation around Grace”, Pro Ecclesia 28:2 (2019), pp. 141–148.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1063851219842388
(2017) offers a theological interpretation of 2:15–21, showing that Paul had a thick and robust view of justification. He viewed justification as something participatory, transforming humans. This notion can expand modern theological horizons and even break down theological differences between people. In a study of the Biblical theology of circumcision, Karl Deenick
420 Another set of reactions was published in 2020: N. Eubank, “Configurations of Grace and Merit in Paul and His Interpreters”, International Journal of Systematic Theology 22:1 (2020), pp. 7–17,
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijst.12396
, G. Macaskill, “Dynamic Reciprocity and Ontological Affinity in the Pauline Account of Solidarity”, International Journal of Systematic Theology 22:1 (2020), pp. 18–28,
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijst.12392
, D.H. Bertschmann, “Ex nihilo or tabula rasa? God’s Grace between Freedom and Fidelity”, International Journal of Systematic Theology 22:1 (2020), pp. 29–46,
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijst.12397
, J.A. Linebaugh, “Incongruous and Creative Grace: Reading Paul and the Gift with Martin Luther”, International Journal of Systematic Theology 22:1 (2020), pp. 47–59,
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijst.12388
, S. Zahl, “Incongruous Grace as Pattern of Experience”, International Journal of Systematic Theology 22:1 (2020), pp. 60–76,
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijst.12402
, K. Kilby, “Paradox and Paul: Catholic and Protestant Theologies of Grace”, International Journal of Systematic Theology 22:1 (2020), pp. 77–82,
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijst.12393
For Barclay’s response, see: J.M.G. Barclay, “Paul and Grace in Theological Perspective: A Grateful Response”, International Journal of Systematic Theology 22:1 (2020), pp. 113–126.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijst.12389
(2018) summarises Paul’s view on the matter in Galatians as an emphasis on the fact that circumcision signified God’s promise to Abraham. However, this was not about descent according to the flesh but rather about having faith in the “seed” that God promised. According to Peter Oakes
421407 T. Morgan, Roman Faith and Christian Faith: Pistis and fides in the Early Roman Empire and Early Churches (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 262–306.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198724148. 001.0001
(2018), it is best to understand “faith” in Galatians as relational, with “faith” denoting trust in and loyalty to the relationship between Christ and believers. In a study of God as depicted in the Pauline letters as both judge and justifier, James B. Prothro
422408 Op cit., p. 282.
(2018) argues that Paul’s picture of God as justifier in essence continues legal conceptualisations of God in the Jewish theological vocabulary used by early believers. Archimandrite Serhii
423409 O. McFarland, God and Grace in Philo and Paul (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 164, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2015). https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004308589
(2018) stresses Paul’s idea that salvation is a gift of God continuously to be experienced in faith. This also entails a constant struggle between one’s old sinful nature and the new nature in Christ – a personal battle in which believers should let their new nature in Christ triumph over their old nature. Thomas D. Stegman
424410 H. Stettler, “Did Paul Invent Justification by Faith?”, Tyndale Bulletin 66:2 (2015), pp. 161–196.
https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.29395
(2018) views justification in Galatians from a Roman Catholic perspective and argues that the letter supports the Catholic notion that justification is transformative and that the Catechism of the Catholic Church may thus illuminate one’s understanding of the letter. Gregory Tatum
425411 P. Cimala, “Paul’s Metaphorical Soteriology: Galatians as a Test Case”, Neotestamentica 49:2 (2015), pp. 351–376.
https://doi.org/10.1353/neo.2016.0005
(2018) offers a participationist eschatological reading of justification in Galatians, Philippians and Romans. Paul’s distinction between justification according to the flesh and according to the Spirit is a cosmological distinction, implying a participationist eschatological view of justification. Believers participate in Christ’s death and resurrection, with final justification entailing a judgement in terms of works of love (enabled by the Spirit). According to Christina Eschner
426412 P.J. Leithart, Delivered from the Elements of the World: Atonement, Justification, Mission (Grand Rapids MI: InterVarsity Press, 2016).
(2019), it is not correct to explain Paul’s view of Christ’s death in 2:20 against the background of the notion of atonement. It should rather be interpreted in terms of the Greek notion of an apotropaic death, the giving of oneself for the fatherland or for another person. Christopher M. Tuckett
427413 D.L. Matson, “Divine Forgiveness in Paul? Justification by Faith and the Logic of Pauline Soteriology”, Stone-Campbell Journal 19 (2016), pp. 59–83.
(2019) investigates present and future salvation in Galatians by looking at 1:4. According to Tuckett, one cannot understand the “rescue” mentioned in this verse as something that has already been achieved in spite of the fact that there is so much emphasis in the letter on divine initiative, since the letter makes it clear that human reaction also has a role to play in the process. Joel L. Watts
428414 S. Ota, “The Holistic pistis and Abraham’s Faith (Galatians 3)”, Hitotsubashi Journal of Arts & Sciences 57:1 (2016), pp. 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.15057/28246
(2019) proposes that Jesus’ death followed a well-known Roman and Jewish model of people sacrificing themselves, called devotio. In Galatians, Paul uses this model to depict Jesus’ death as a death that was premeditated and which he chose himself in order to bring about changes to the cosmos. Logan Williams
429415 F. Vaz dos Santos, “A Expressão ‘em Cristo’ nas Cartas Paulinas”, Revista Batista Pioneira 5:2 (2016), pp. 401–438.
(2019) disagrees with scholars who interpret 1:4 and 2:20 as merely referring to Christ’s death as a self-sacrifice, i.e., as a giving up of his own interests. According to Williams, Christ is depicted here as giving himself (as a gift). Thus, Christ’s death is also viewed as bringing about a mutual relationship in which he received people into a relationship with him. Jeannette Hagan Pifer
430416 S. Butticaz, “Paul et la culture antique l’honneur: Contexte et enjeux de la justification par la foi dans la Lettre aux Galates”, Annali di Storia dell’Esegesi 33:1 (2016), pp. 107–128.
(2019) focuses on faith as participation in the Pauline letters, arguing that Paul’s notion of faith is closely linked to the notion of participation in Christ and that Paul’s view of faith reflects a multifaceted way of existence, with believers having to both negate and involve themselves in their dependence on Christ. Martinus C. de Boer
431417 S. Butticaz, “La Lettre de Paul aux Galates: De la théologie de la croix à la justification par la foi?”, Revue de Théologie et de Philosophie 149 (2017), pp. 323–340.
(2020) raises the question as to how Paul’s view of justification in Romans appears from the perspective of Galatians. De Boer concludes this investigation as follows: “In Romans, Paul does not abandon the dissociation of justification from the Law and its exclusive association with Christ he propounded in Galatians. There are, however, at least four points at which Romans differs explicitly and significantly from Galatians: (1) the use of the expression dikaiosyne theou, ‘the justness of God,’ along with its apocalyptic implications; (2) justification as a present reality for the believer in Christ; (3) justification as forgiveness of past sins; and (4) justification as rectification in God’s ongoing battle on behalf of human beings against the malevolent, supra-human forces of Sin and Death.”
432418 A.K. Boakye, Death and Life: Resurrection, Restoration, and Rectification in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2017). In a study of Paul’s language of faith, Nijay K. Gupta
433419 M.J. Gorman, “Reading Gal 2:15–21 Theologically: Beyond Old and New, Beyond West and East”, in: A. Despotis (ed.), Participation, Justification, and Conversion: Eastern Orthodox Interpretation of Paul and the Debate between “Old and New Perspectives on Paul” (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.442, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), pp. 321–354.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155453-7
Adapted version: M.J. Gorman, Participating in Christ: Explorations in Paul’s Theology and Spirituality (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2019), pp. 115–149. See also pp. 150–177 in this book where Gorman argues that Paul restates Galatians 2:15–21 for a different audience in 2 Corinthians 5:14 – 21.
(2020) points out that the concept “faith” is nowadays used with nuances not reflecting accurately what Paul had in mind. Gupta opts for understanding it in the sense of faithfulness, incorporating belief, trust and action. In Galatians the movement from “covenantal nomism” to “covenantal pistism” is highlighted. Andrew Hollingsworth
434420 K. Deenick, Righteous by Promise: A Biblical Theology of Circumcision (New Studies in Biblical Theology 45, London/Downers Grove IL: Apollos/InterVarsity Press, 2018), pp. 185–210.
(2020) understands justification as a declaration by God that one is righteous. This is illuminated by means of speech act theory and illustrated by 2:15–16 and other Pauline texts. Simong Seung-Hyun Lee
435421 P. Oakes, “Pistis as Relational Way of Life in Galatians”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 40:3 (2018), pp. 255–275.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064x18755933
(2020) argues that it is wrong to restrict Paul’s view of justification to a forensic declaration that one’s sin is acquitted. From Galatians, it is clear that justification includes the new life that believers acquire by walking according to the Spirit. Teresa Morgan
436422 J.B. Prothro, Both Judge and Justifier: Biblical Legal Language and the Act of Justifying in Paul (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.461, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-156117-7
(2020) is critical of the widely-held view that “in Christ” should be interpreted as a reference to union with and participation in Christ. Morgan’s alternative (identified as an “encheiristic meaning”) is that it refers to being in the hands of someone. Paul thus uses the expression to refer to the fact that believers are Christ’s responsibility, under his authority and dependent upon him. Benjamin Schliesser
437423 A. Serhii, “Збереження Християнина у Спасінні”, Волинський благовісник 6 (2018), pp. 37–54.
(2020) is of the opinion that Pauline scholars fail to grasp the implications of Paul’s statement that faith “came” and “was revealed” (3:23, 25). This shows that Paul thought of faith as more than a mere human disposition; it was also a supra-individual event.
13.2 The New Perspective on Paul
Frank J. Matera
438424 T.D. Stegman, “Justification in Galatians: A Roman Catholic Perspective”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 53–62. For a response, see P.J. Leithart, “Response: Galatians Five Hundred Years Later”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 63–71.
(2000) provides an overview of the challenges posed by the New Perspective with regard to Paul’s view of justification by faith in Galatians. However, according to Matera, this does not mean that one cannot preach on the letter anymore. Daryl D. Schmidt
439425 G. Tatum, “A Participationist Eschatological Reading of Justification in Galatians, Philippians, and Romans”, Revue Biblique 125:2 (2018), pp. 223–238.
https://doi.org/10.2143/rbi.125.2.3285116
For a response, see D.A. Campbell, “A Participationist Eschatological Account of Justification: Further Reflections”, Revue Biblique 125:2 (2018), pp. 249–261.
https://doi.org/10.2143/rbi.125.2.3285118
(2002) draws attention to the effect that the New Perspective has on translation issues in Romans and Galatians. Terms such as “righteousness of God”, “faith of Christ” and “works of the law” are discussed, and 2:15–21 is used to illustrate this. James D.G. Dunn
440426 C. Eschner, “‘Der mich geliebt und sich selbst “für” mich hingegeben hat’ (Gal 2,20): Die griechische Konzeption des Unheil abwendenden
(2005), who was the first to use the expression “New Perspective on Paul” (in 1983), published a detailed overview of his own academic journey in this regard. In this study, Dunn emphasises that one should not regard the New Perspective as a replacement of other, earlier perspectives on Paul, but that it should more precisely be seen as complementing other perspectives. Dunn also provides a brief summary of what is meant by the concept of a New Perspective on Paul: “1. It is based on Sander’s new view on Second-Temple Judaism, in particular the notion of covenantal nomism; 2. It stresses that the law always had a social function: being holy required separateness from other nations; 3. It emphasises that Paul’s teaching on justification focused to a large extent on overcoming the barrier between Jews and Gentiles; 4. It presupposes that ‘works of the law’ was a key term in Pauline thinking, mainly because many Jewish believers insisted that certain works were needed for staying within the covenant, and thus for salvation; 5. It argues that failure to realise the importance of this aspect of Paul’s view on justification might have had a negative influence on efforts to combat racialism and nationalism in the past.”
441
Toit, C. Gerber and C. Zimmermann (eds.), Sōtēria: Salvation in Early Christianity and Antiquity: Festschrift in Honour of Cilliers Breytenbach on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday (Novum Testamentum Supplements 175, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2019), pp. 307–329. Sterbens als zentrale Heilskategorie des Galaterbriefes”, in: D.S. du
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004396883_017
Michael F. Bird
442427 C.M. Tuckett, “Galatians 1:4: Present and Future Salvation in Galatians”, in: D.S. du Toit, C. Gerber and C. Zimmermann (eds.), Sōtēria: Salvation in Early Christianity and Antiquity: Festschrift in Honour of Cilliers Breytenbach on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday (Novum Testamentum Supplements 175, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2019), pp. 330–344.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004396883_018
(2006) draws attention to the fact that the New Perspective has led to what is regarded as two opposing views about Paul’s understanding of justification, either a focus on one’s legal status in the eyes of God or on membership of the covenant but argues that both elements are vital for understanding Paul correctly, as God creates a new people as part of a new covenant by justification. In another contribution, Bird
443428 J.L. Watts, Jesus as Divine Suicide: The Death of the Messiah in Galatians (Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2019).
(2007) argues that an analysis of Galatians and Romans shows that the forensic and covenantal dimensions of justification are both important if one wishes to gain a comprehensive understanding of Paul’s view of justification. Francis Watson
444429 L. Williams, “Giving the Self through Death: A Crucified Christ as Gift in Galatians”, in: K. Kilby and R. Davies (eds.), Suffering and the Christian Life (London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2019), pp. 23–32.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567687265.0006
(2007) tries to move beyond the New Perspective by using the notion of “covenantal nomism” to emphasise the uniqueness of Paul’s argument against “works of the law”. Watson points out that divine agency played a more important role in Paul’s thoughts than in Judaism, by showing that the expression “works of the law” does not refer to boundary markers, and by arguing that Paul did not have an inclusive understanding of God’s people but advocated a sectarian approach. Don Garlington
445430 J.H. Pifer, Faith as Participation: An Exegetical Study of Some Key Pauline Texts (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.486, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019), pp. 119–215.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-156477-2
(2008) investigates Paul’s use of the “partisan ἐκ” (“from”) in Galatians and argues that Paul uses it to indicate source and belonging, with the notion of belonging getting the most emphasis. For Garlington, this supports the view of the New Perspective on justification. Jens-Christian Maschmeier
446431 M.C. de Boer, Paul, Theologian of God’s Apocalypse: Essays on Paul and Apocalyptic (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2020), pp. 131–141.
(2010) attempts to move beyond Lutheran and New Perspective views. According to Maschmeier, Paul is not arguing in anthropological terms but from a redemptive-historical point of view. Only after the eschatological judgement had been passed on humanity as sinners and only after Christ’s death had opened a new way of escaping this judgement, could observance of the law no longer lead to justification. Gab-Jong Choi
447432 Op. cit., p. 140.
(2010) offers an evangelical response to the New Perspective: although the New Perspective offers some new insights on the covenant and the law in Judaism of Paul’s time, it does not interpret Paul’s writings adequately. Andrew Hassler
448433 N.K. Gupta, Paul and the Language of Faith (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2020).
(2011) is of the opinion that Jewish legalism was more important to Paul than is assumed by supporters of the New Perspective, and that the corporate aspects of Paul’s soteriology should be informed by a sensitivity for an individual approach to justification. Todd Scacewater
449434 A. Hollingsworth, “Soteriological Speech Acts: Justification as Divine Performative”, Churchman 134:1 (2020), pp. 49–69.
(2013) disagrees with the way in which proponents of the New Perspective on Paul interpret the expression “works of the law”. According to Scacewater, it is clear from 2:11–21 that it refers to the commandments of the law which were performed in order to be justified.Jens Schröter
450435 S.S.-H. Lee, “Galatians’ Justification Seen through Abraham’s Sonship and the Promised Spirit”, 신약논단 27:1 (2020), pp. 229–269.
(2013) explains the implications of the New Perspective on Paul for the Lutheran understanding of Paul, in particular by looking at 2:15–17. Schröter highlights the importance of the notion of God’s justifying grace but also points out that the social and ecclesiological implications of this idea sometimes do not receive enough attention in Lutheran circles. Peter von der Osten-Sacken
451436 T. Morgan, Being “in Christ” in the Letters of Paul: Saved through Christ and in His Hands (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 1.449, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2020), pp. 63–72.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-159886-9
(2014) offers an overview of Sanders’s and Dunn’s contributions to the New Perspective, but criticises both attempts: Sanders, because his explanation of “Judaism” and “Christianity” as two different patterns of religion is not historically plausible, and Dunn, because he accepted Paul’s view that Israel’s attitude towards the law was that of being justified by the “works of the law”. Jens-Christian Maschmeier
452437 B. Schliesser, “Glaube als Ereignis: Zu einer vernachlässigten Dimension des paulinischen Glaubensverständnisses”, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 117:1 (2020), pp. 21–45.
https://doi.org/10.1628/zthk-2020-0003
(2017) believes that the typical Lutheran view of justification marginalises the role of humans as agents, but that the notion of sola gratia and the idea of human agency go well together. Amongst others, Maschmeier illustrates this by means of an analysis of 2:14–21. David I. Yoon (2019)
453438 F.J. Matera, “Galatians in Perspective: Cutting a New Path through Old Territory”, Interpretation 54:3 (2000), pp. 233–245.
offers a detailed discourse analysis of Galatians (based on systemic functional linguistics) in order to determine whether the situation reflected in the letter is explained best by the New Perspective on Paul, covenantal nomism or legalism. Based on this analysis, Yoon argues that Paul was faced by a nuanced form of legalism and not by covenantal nomism. Maksimilijan Matjaž
454439 D.D. Schmidt, “Paul in a New Idiom: Translation Issues in Romans and Galatians”, Forum 5:2 (2002), pp. 127–147.
(2020) works out the implications of the New Perspective for the relationship between Christians and Jews. Paul’s theology and Jewish theology are both based on the same foundation, God calling humans to the promised land and into a new covenant. This fact poses a challenge for current relationships between Christians and Jews.
13.3 The expression “faith of Christ”
R. Barry Matlock
455440 J.D.G. Dunn, “The New Perspective on Paul: Whence, What, Whither?”, in: J.D.G. Dunn (ed.), The New Perspective on Paul: Collected Essays (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.185, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), pp. 1–88. https://doi.org/
10.1628/978-3-16-151488-3
(2000) attempts to detheologise the “faith of Christ” debate by approaching the matter from a lexical semantic perspective. According to Matlock, from such a perspective, the objective interpretation of the expression is to be preferred. Denis R. Lindsay
456441 Op. cit., p. 15.
(2000) draws attention to three parallel expressions in 2:16–3:5: “faith of Christ”, “works of the law” and “hearing of faith”. Lindsay is of the opinion that the genitive should be interpreted in all three instances as an attributive genitive/genitive of quality, which means that “faith of Christ” should be understood as faith pertaining solely to Christ, faith that is consistent with Christ. Hung-Sik Choi
457442 M.F. Bird, “Justification as Forensic Declaration and Covenant Membership: A via media between Reformed and Revisionist Readings of Paul”, Tyndale Bulletin 57:1 (2006), pp. 109–130.
https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.29207
(2005) points out that scholars tend to overlook the value of 5:5–6 for the “faith of Christ” debate and argues that the term “faith” in vv. 5 and 6 refers to Christ’s faithfulness and not to believers’ faith in him. Paul Ellingworth
458443 M.F. Bird, The Saving Righteousness of God: Studies on Paul, Justification and the New Perspective (Paternoster Biblical Monographs, Waynesboro GA/Milton Keynes/Eugene OR: Paternoster/Wipf & Stock, 2007).
(2005) is of the opinion that the structure of 2:16 serves as an indication that Paul is referring to faith in Christ in this verse. Arthur A. Just Jr.
459444 F. Watson, Paul, Judaism, and the Gentiles: Beyond the New Perspective (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2007, rev. and expanded edition). Original version: F. Watson, Paul, Judaism, and the Gentiles: A Sociological Approach (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986).
(2006) agrees with Richard Hays that “faith of Christ” refers to Christ’s faithful death on behalf of humans and discusses the implications of such a choice for Lutheran theology. On the basis of the insight that ἀκοῆς πίστεως (“hearing of faith”) in 3:2 and 5 refers to the faith of the Galatians, Debbie Hunn
460445 D. Garlington, “Paul’s ‘Partisan ἐκ’ and the Question of Justification in Galatians”, Journal of Biblical Literature 127:3 (2008), pp. 567–590. Jan Lambrecht disagrees with Garlington. According to Lambrecht, Garlington misses the notion of instrumentality in 2:16 and in other passages in the letter. Furthermore, in cases where ἐκ (“from”) indicates belonging, it does not indicate realm or sphere. See J. Lambrecht, “Critical Reflections on Paul’s ‘Partisan ἐκ’ as Recently Presented by Don Garlington”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 85:1 (2009), pp. 135–141.
https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.85.1.2040699
(2006) maintains that “faith in Christ” in 2:16 refers to human faith in Christ. Roy A. Harrisville III
461446 J.-C. Maschmeier, Rechtfertigung bei Paulus: Eine Kritik alter und neuer Paulusperspektiven (Beiträge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament 189, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2010).
(2006) draws attention to evidence from pre-Christian Greek authors, in whose writings there is an abundance of evidence that it would have been quite normal to interpret “faith of Christ” as an objective genitive and that it would have been regarded as good Greek. In a detailed study of the expression “faith of Christ” in Paul’s letters, Karl Friedrich Ulrichs
462447 G.-J. Choi, “Korean Church and Soteriology: An Evangelical Response to the New Perspective with Special Reference to Paul’s Teachings of ‘Justification by Faith’ in Romans and Galatians”, 성경과 신학 55 (2010), pp. 1–40.
(2007) argues that the issue is more complex than merely choosing between an objective and subjective genitive. By means of the expression, Paul succeeded in integrating various models of justification, the notion of participation in Christ and the perspective that the Spirit was a gift from God. One of the arguments used against an objective interpretation of the expression “faith of Christ” is that it creates redundancy. R. Barry Matlock
463448 A. Hassler, “Ethnocentric Legalism and the Justification of the Individual: Rethinking Some New Perspective Assumptions”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 54:2 (2011), pp. 311–327.
(2007) evaluates this argument critically by looking at 2:16, 3:22, Romans 3:22 and Philippians 3:9 and finds that it is not convincing. An objective interpretation is thus to be preferred. Jae Hyun Lee
464449 T. Scacewater, “Galatians 2:11–21 and the Interpretive Context of ‘Works of the Law’”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 56:2 (2013), pp. 307–323.
(2008) maintains that Paul wishes to contrast the human act of faith and works of the law in 2:16 and 3:6. One thus cannot accept the argument that Hays offers for the subjective genitive (that Paul wishes to contrast human and divine action). David L. Stubbs
465450 J. Schröter, “‘The New Perspective on Paul’: Eine Anfrage an die Lutherische Paulusdeutung?”, Lutherjahrbuch 80 (2013), pp. 142–158.
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666874451.142
(2008) explains the two patterns of soteriology underlying the subjective and objective interpretations of the expression “faith of Christ” and opts for the subjective interpretation, situating it within a broader view of faith as faithfulness and an emphasis on participation in Christ. Debbie Hunn
466451 P. von der Osten-Sacken, Der Gott der Hoffnung: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Theologie des Paulus (Studien zu Kirche und Israel: Neue Folge 3, Leipzig:
(2009) offers a thorough overview of the debate in scholarship on the faithfulness of Christ, since the time of Johannes Hauβleiter and Gerhard Kittel and points out that it is difficult to make a choice, since both the subjective and objective interpretations of the expression fit the context. Ardel B. Caneday
467
Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2014), pp. 338–355.
(2009) highlights the importance of the faithfulness of Christ as theme in Galatians, in particular in terms of the polarity found in the letter between “works of the law” and “faith of Christ”. The faithfulness of Christ achieved what the law could not. R. Barry Matlock
468452 J.-C. Maschmeier, “Justification and Ethics: Theological Consequences of a New Perspective on Paul”, Theological Review 38:1 (2017), pp. 35–53. See also the response by J.B. Awwad, “A Response to ‘Justification and Ethics’”, Theological Review 38:1 (2017), pp. 54–64.
(2009) offers arguments for an objective interpretation of the expression, amongst others the parallel between “faith of Christ” and “works of the law”. Mark A. Seifrid
469453 D.I. Yoon, A Discourse Analysis of Galatians and the New Perspective on Paul (Linguistic Biblical Studies 17, Leiden: Brill, 2019).
(2009) is of the opinion that merely choosing between a subjective and an objective interpretation of the expression does not really solve the problem and that it should thus rather be interpreted as referring to Christ as both the author and the source of one’s faith. Preston M. Sprinkle
470454 M. Matjaž, “Pavlovo Razumevanje Postave in del Postave v Pismu Galačanom”, Edinost in Dialog 75:2 (2020), pp. 51–71.
https://doi.org/10.34291/edinost/75/02/matjaz
(2009) opts for a third alternative in this debate. Sprinkle argues that the expression refers to “Christ-faith”, i.e., it is a reference to the gospel regarding the eschatological act that God performed in Christ. Francis Watson
471455 R.B. Matlock, “Detheologizing the ΠΙΣΤΙΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ Debate: Cautionary Remarks from a Lexical Semantic Perspective”, Novum Testamentum 42:1 (2000), pp. 1–23.
(2009) is of the opinion that Paul’s formulation “faith of Christ” was based on Habakkuk 2:4, which implies that he referred to faith in the saving acts of God. In a study of the expression “faith of Christ” in Paul’s letters, Eung-Bong Lee
472456 D.R. Lindsay, “Works of Law, Hearing of Faith and πίστις Χριστοῦ in Galatians 2:16–3:5”, Stone-Campbell Journal 3:1 (2000), pp. 79–88.
(2009) rejects the arguments for the objective interpretation of the expression and suggests that it refers to Christ as the one creating faith in believers. Roy A. Harrisville III
473457 H.-S. Choi, “ΠΙΣΤΙΣ in Galatians 5:5–6: Neglected Evidence for the Faithfulness of Christ”, Journal of Biblical Literature 124:3 (2005), pp. 467–490.
https://doi.org/10.2307/30041035
(2010) suspects supporters of the New Perspective of assuming that faith is not a gift of God and maintains that when Paul contrasts “hearing of faith” and “works of the law” he is contrasting divine gift and human work, not two types of human work. Accordingly, “faith of Christ” refers to faith in Christ. Matthew C. Easter
474458 P. Ellingworth, “A Note on Galatians 2.16”, Bible Translator 56:2 (2005), pp. 109–110.
(2010) offers an overview of the most important arguments used in the “faith of Christ” debate and points out that the choices that exegetes make are mostly based on the way in which they understand broader issues in Pauline theology and that this broader framework is thus the true setting of the debate. Gab Jong Choi
475459 A.A. Just Jr., “The Faith of Christ: A Lutheran Appropriation of Richard Hays’s Proposal”, Concordia Theological Quarterly 70:1 (2006), pp. 3–15.
(2011) offers a contextual investigation of 2:15–21, 3:1–29 and 5:2–6, arguing that the expression “faith of Christ” indicates the way in which God’s righteousness is attained and not how God reveals it. The expression should thus be taken in an objective sense. In an investigation of the expression “faith of Christ” in Galatians, as well as the 13 occurrences of “faith” in Galatians 3, Hyoung Keun Kim
476460 D. Hunn, “πίστις Χριστοῦ in Galatians 2:16: Clarification from 3:1–6”, Tyndale Bulletin 57:1 (2006), pp. 23–33.
https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.29203
(2012) chooses for not separating the subjective and objective interpretations: they should rather be integrated so that one can gain a holistic view of justification. According to Debbie Hunn
477461 R.A. Harrisville III, “Before πίστις Χριστοῦ: The Objective Genitive as Good Greek”, Novum Testamentum 48:4 (2006), pp. 353–358.
(2012), the exegetical discussion on the interpretation of “the faith of Christ” should be guided by the fact that Paul quotes Habakkuk 2:4 in Galatians 3:11. This makes the objective interpretation more likely. Jermo van Nes
478462 K.F. Ulrichs, Christusglaube: Studien zum Syntagma πίστις Χριστοῦ und zum paulinischen Verständnis von Glaube und Rechtfertigung (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.227, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151570-5
(2013) draws attention to the significance of a variant reading of v. 20b: ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ (“in faith of God and Christ I live”). This reading suggests that the expression “faith of Christ” should be interpreted as an objective genitive. Benjamin Schliesser
479463 R.B. Matlock, “The Rhetoric of πίστις in Paul: Galatians 2.16, 3.22, Romans 3.22, and Philippians 3.9”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 30:2 (2007), pp. 173–203.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X07084775
(2015) points out that contemporary scholarship is wrongly under the impression that Johannes Hausβleiter was the first scholar to suggest a subjective interpretation of the expression “faith of Christ” in 1891 but that this is not true, since such an interpretation was already considered from the 1820s onwards. In another contribution, Schliesser
480464 J.H. Lee, “Against Richard B. Hays’s ‘Faith of Jesus Christ’”, Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism 5 (2008), pp. 51–80.
(2016) opts for a “third view” in the “faith of Christ” debate. From 3:23–26 it is clear that Paul did not regard faith as an individual event (i.e., neither as the faith of Christ nor of the believer) but viewed it primarily as an eschatological event. Faith “came” and “was revealed”. According to Debbie Hunn
481465 D.L. Stubbs, “The Shape of Soteriology and the pistis Christou Debate”, Scottish Journal of Theology 61:2 (2008), pp. 137–157.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S003693060800329X
(2016), 5:5–6, a passage that is usually neglected in the “faith of Christ” debate, provides the following two pieces of evidence in support of interpreting “faith” as referring to human faith: (1) By contrasting faith and law in this pericope, Paul picks up the same contrast in Chapters 2 and 3 (where faith refers to human faith); (2) In vv. 5–6, Paul refers to faith working though love, thus implying that he refers to human faith. Byeng-Hee Jeon
482466 D. Hunn, “Debating the Faithfulness of Jesus Christ in Twentieth-Century Scholarship”, in: M.F. Bird and P. Sprinkle (eds.), The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies (Milton Keynes/Peabody MA: Paternoster/Hendrickson, 2009), pp. 15–32.
(2016) offers several arguments to support an objective interpretation of the expression “faith of Christ” in 2:16: the context of the argument, the reference to the Galatians’ experience of the Spirit in the next pericope and the quotations from the Hebrew Bible that Paul uses. In a discussion of the meaning of the term “faith” in the expression “faith of Christ” in Romans, Morna D. Hooker
483467 A.B. Caneday, “The Faithfulness of Jesus Christ as a Theme in Paul’s Theology in Galatians”, in: M.F. Bird and P. Sprinkle (eds.), The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies (Milton Keynes/Peabody MA: Paternoster/Hendrickson, 2009), pp. 185–205.
(2016) maintains that the expression primarily refers to the faith or faithfulness of Christ but that it includes the fact that believers share his faith/faithfulness because they are in him. Chris Kugler
484468 R.B. Matlock, “Saving Faith: The Rhetoric and Semantics of πίστις in Paul”, in: M.F. Bird and P. Sprinkle (eds.), The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies (Milton Keynes/Peabody MA: Paternoster/Hendrickson, 2009), pp. 73–90.
(2016) offers a survey of the state of the debate on the expression “faith of Christ” and the arguments that are used to support the two options. Kugler is of the opinion that the subjective interpretation currently has the most supporters in Pauline scholarship. Suzan J.M. Sierksma-Agteres
485469 M.A. Seifrid, “The Faith of Christ”, in: M.F. Bird and P. Sprinkle (eds.), The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies (Milton Keynes/Peabody MA: Paternoster/Hendrickson, 2009), pp. 129–147.
(2016) supports the option of interpreting Paul’s use of the expression “faith of Christ” as a purposeful ambiguity by investigating Paul’s imitation language against the background of the way in which imitation functioned in the Hellenistic-Roman world, in particular in philosophical training. This suggests that one should interpret the expression as shorthand for believers mimetically moving in faith/faithfulness through Christ towards God. According to David J. Downs and Benjamin J. Lappenga
486470 P.M. Sprinkle, “πίστις Χριστοῦ as an Eschatological Event”, in: M.F. Bird and P.M. Sprinkle (eds.), The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies (Milton Keynes/Peabody MA: Paternoster/Hendrickson, 2009), pp. 165–184.
(2019), proponents of both sides in the “faith of Christ” debate tend to ignore the role of the Risen Christ and they thus argue that when Paul refers to the “faithfulness” of Christ, he has the faithfulness of the Risen Christ in mind. Sang Mok Lee
487471 F. Watson, “By Faith (of Christ): An Exegetical Dilemma and Its Scriptural Solution”, in: M.F. Bird and P. Sprinkle (eds.), The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies (Milton Keynes/Peabody MA: Paternoster/Hendrickson, 2009), pp. 147–164.
(2019) maintains that Paul deliberately used the expression “faith of Christ” ambiguously in order to criticise Roman imperial cult and ideology by opposing Christ’s faithfulness to that of the emperor, thus encouraging believers to live in the right relationship to Christ. Ryan S. Schellenberg
488472 E.-B. Lee, “A Study of pistis Christou in Paul’s Letters”, 신약논단 16:2 (2009), pp. 561–588.
(2019) points out that the term οἱ πιστεύοντες (“the believers”) was a self-designation of early Christians and argues that it is thus unlikely that this term refers to Christ’s faith/faithfulness in 3:22 (as well as in Romans 3:22). Kevin Grasso
489473 R.A. Harrisville III, “πίστις Χριστοῦ and the New Perspective on Paul”, Logia 19:2 (2010), pp. 19–28.
(2020) argues in favour of a third view in the “faith of Christ” debate. Works in theoretical linguistics show that the expression is best translated as “Christ-faith” with “faith” referring to a belief-system and “Christ” qualifying the system.
13.4 Salvation history in Galatians
Bruce Longenecker
490474 M.C. Easter, “The pistis Christou Debate: Main Arguments and Responses in Summary”, Currents in Biblical Research 9:1 (2010), pp. 33–47.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1476993X09360725
(2012) offers an overview of the way in which Paul’s view of salvation history fluctuated between 50 CE (the writing of 1 Thessalonians) and 57 CE (the writing of Romans) in terms of 13 points. According to Longenecker, in Galatians, Paul did not yet use an expanded-covenant view of salvation history. This is only found later in Romans 11. Jason Maston (2012)
491475 G.J. Choi, “How To Interpret πίστις Χριστοῦ: With a Contextual Study of ‘Faith’ and ‘Righteousness’ in Galatians 2:15–21, 3:1–29 and 5:2–6”,
disagrees with scholars who are of the opinion that Paul’s apocalyptic theology in Galatians implies the absence of salvation history. Maston detects a notion of salvation history underlying 3:15–4:7 according to which the period of the law is portrayed as a period of “Unheil”. Michael Bachmann (2012)
492
10:4 (2011), pp. 911–940. 신약연구
notes that the notion of salvation history is a controversial issue in Pauline studies. However, that the most important aspects of identity are found in Pauline writings can be shown from Galatians, in which case one may discern the following aspects: individual, social, mental and habitual aspects of identity. In another contribution, Bachmann
493476 H.K. Kim, “‘Faith of Christ’ and ‘Faith in Christ’: In a Zero-Sum or Win-Win Relationship? A Re-Consideration of pistis Christou in Galatians”, 신약연구 11:4 (2012), pp. 890–929.
https://doi.org/10.24229/kents.2012.11.4.005
For a response, see: G.-J. Choi, “Again πίστις Χριστοῦ: A Rejoinder of Keun Hyung Kim’s ‘Faith of Christ’ and ‘Faith in Christ’: In a Zero-Sum Relationship or Win-Win Relationship? A Re-Consideration of pistis Christou in Galatians”, 신약연구 12:2 (2013), pp. 302–333.
https://doi.org/10.24229/kents.2013.13.2.005
(2016) argues that both spatial and salvation-historical categories are important for understanding Galatians. For Paul, God’s actions in the history of Israel, of Christ and of believers are important. Bachmann then explains this further in terms of temporal moments in the letter. Sigurd Grindheim
494477 D. Hunn, “Pistis Christou in Galatians: The Connection to Habakkuk 2:4”, Tyndale Bulletin 63:1 (2012), pp. 75–91.
(2013) contends that the central issue in Galatians is “salvation territory” and not “salvation history”, since spatial categories are of more importance than temporal categories. Paul urges the Galatians to remain in the domain of Christ and not to return to spiritual slavery. T. David Gordon
495478 J. van Nes, “‘Faith(Fulness) of the Son of God’? Galatians 2:20b Reconsidered”, Novum Testamentum 55:2 (2013), pp. 127–139.
https://doi.org/10.1163/15685365-12341418
(2013) prefers a covenant-historical approach to a salvation-/covenant-theological approach to Galatians and offers an interpretation of the letter based on the notion that Paul traces three different covenant-administrations in the letter: the Abrahamic, Sinaic and New Covenants. Edwin Chr. van Driel
496479 B. Schliesser, “‘Exegetical Amnesia’ and ΠΙΣΤΙΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ: The ‘Faith of Christ’ in Nineteenth-Century Pauline Scholarship”, The Journal of Theological Studies 66:1 (2015), pp. 61–89.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/flv008
(2014) finds both salvation-historical and apocalyptic approaches to Galatians Christologically deficient, and offers a third option, a supralapsarian reading of the letter. Christ’s incarnation was not merely a response to human sinfulness. Christ is the source and goal of history.
13.5 Wirkungsgeschichte
Mark A. Seifrid
497480 B. Schliesser, “‘Christ-Faith’ as an Eschatological Event (Galatians 3.23–26): A ‘Third View’ on πίστις Χριστοῦ”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 38:3 (2016), pp. 277–300.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X15621654
(2003) focuses on Luther’s interpretation of justification in 2:15–21. Luther interpreted it forensically but regarded it as more than a mere declaration on God’s part or just a transaction performed in the past to be accepted by humans at a later stage. One only has justification as one grasps Christ. Stephen Westerholm
498481 D. Hunn, “πίστις in Galatians 5.5–6: Neglected Evidence for ‘Faith in Christ’”, New Testament Studies 62:3 (2016), pp. 477–483.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688516000096
(2004) offers a detailed and critical review of the “Lutheran Paul” and the twentieth-century response to it. One of the themes that Westerholm investigates is the theme “justification by faith”. In the case of Galatians, Westerholm finds that although it is true that Paul did not address Pelagianism or sixteenth-century disputes, he nevertheless insisted that the unrighteous were declared righteous because of faith. In the light of criticism raised by the New Perspective on Paul against the way in which the Reformed tradition read Paul, Stephen Chester
499482 B.-H. Jeon, “Paul’s Argument About Faith in Galatians 2:16”, 신약연구 15:3 (2016), pp. 564–592.
(2008) discusses the way in which Erasmus and the Reformers interpreted 2:16, in particular the expression “works of the law”, the notion of justification by faith and the expression “faith in Christ/the faithfulness of Christ”. In another contribution, Chester
500483 M.D. Hooker, “Another Look at πίστις Χριστοῦ”, Scottish Journal of Theology 69:1 (2016), pp. 46–62.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0036930615000770
(2009) argues that, contrary to what is often claimed, the failure of traditional Protestant interpretations of Pauline theology to relate justification by faith to participatory categories does not stem from Luther. In Luther’s exegesis of Galatians, he integrated the two effectively. One of the issues that Mickey L. Mattox
501484 C. Kugler, “ΠΙΣΤΙΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ: The Current State of Play and the Key Arguments”, Currents in Biblical Research 14:2 (2016), pp. 244–255.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1476993X14549917
(2009) discusses in a study of Luther’s reception of Paul, is his lectures on Galatians. Mattox points out that Luther identified justification as the central theme of the letter and that he distinguished “righteousness of faith” from all other types of religious or civil righteousness. Luther also recognised his own experiences in Paul’s experiences. Johannes Klösges
502485 S.J.M. Sierksma-Agteres, “Imitation in Faith: Enacting Paul’s Ambiguous pistis Christou Formulations on a Greco-Roman Stage”, International Journal of Philosophy and Theology 77:3 (2016), pp. 119–153.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2016.1231076
(2012) highlights the theological implications that Luther drew from 2:16 regarding justification, compares them to the findings of the New Perspective on Paul, situates Luther’s views within developments of a theology of grace and discusses the contemporary implications of all of this. Mark W. Elliott
503486 D.J. Downs and B.J. Lappenga, The Faithfulness of the Risen Christ: Pistis and the Exalted Lord in the Pauline Letters (Waco TX: Baylor University Press, 2019).
(2014) argues that a new perspective on Judaism in Paul’s time does not necessarily imply an entire revision of the way in which justification is perceived in Reformation theology as long as one understands “faith” in such a way that it leaves room for Jesus as the Messiah. George Mombi
504487 S.M. Lee, “Christ’s πίστις vs. Caesar’s fides: πίστις Χριστοῦ in Galatians and the Roman Imperial Cult”, The Expository Times 130:6 (2019), pp. 243–255.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014524618813282
(2013) discusses the implications of Christ’s death for people from Melanesia who have animistic backgrounds and are thus more conscious of spiritual powers. Mombi stresses that Christ triumphed over all the evil forces, also over the ancestral spirits and the masalai. Jonathan A. Linebaugh
505488 R.S. Schellenberg, “οί πίστεύοντες: An Early Christ-Group Self-Designation and Paul’s Rhetoric of Faith”, New Testament Studies 65:1 (2019), pp. 33–42.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0028688518000309
(2013) disagrees with views that reformational interpretations of justification fail to coordinate the notion of justification and Christology. According to Linebaugh, an investigation of Luther’s interpretation of 2:16 and 19–20 shows that his view of faith was radically Christo-centric. Matthias Grebe
506489 K. Grasso, “A Linguistic Analysis of πίστις Χριστοῦ: The Case for the Third View”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 43:1 (2020), pp. 108–144.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064x20949385
(2015) discusses 3:13 in conversation with Barth, also offering a fresh interpretation. Grebe argues that Paul makes a provocative statement in v. 13 to silence his opponents in Galatia. It implies that all humanity (and not the Father as Barth maintains) judged Christ. J. Andrew Cohan
507490 B. Longenecker, “Salvation History in Galatians and the Making of a Pauline Discourse”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 2:2 (2012), pp. 65–87.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26426548
For a response, see: M.C. de Boer, “Salvation History in Galatians? A Response to Bruce W. Longenecker and Jason Maston”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 2:2 (2012), pp. 105–114. https://doi.org/10.2307/26426550
(2018) challenges the commonly accepted view that 2:17 is not directly related to vv. 19–20 by drawing attention to Calvin’s interpretation of these verses. Calvin read v. 20 as referring not to Christ’s indwelling in believers, but to God’s acceptance of them in Christ. Thus, Cowan proposes that vv. 19–20 should be seen as a reference to the justifying relationship mentioned in v. 17. Jonathan A. Linebaugh
508491 J. Maston, “The Nature of Salvation History in Galatians”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 2:2 (2012), pp. 89–103.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26426549
For a response, see M.C. de Boer, “Salvation History in Galatians? A Response to Bruce W. Longenecker and Jason Maston”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 2:2 (2012), pp. 105–114.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26426550
(2018) identifies the “grammar of the gospel” in the Reformation as the expression of Paul’s view of justification in terms of an antithesis, indicating both what the gospel is and what it is not. Linebaugh applies this insight to Galatians, showing how this antithesis functions as a critical hermeneutical criterion in the letter. Thomas Johann Bauer
509492 M. Bachmann, “Identität bei Paulus: Beobachtungen am Galaterbrief”, New Testament Studies 58:4 (2012), pp. 571–597.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688512000148
(2018) points out that Luther’s commentary was one of the central documents of the Reformation, since he discovered in it the message of a gracious God. However, Bauer also shows how the New Perspective on Paul challenges Luther’s interpretation of Paul as well as Protestant theology. According to Edith M. Humphrey
510493 M. Bachmann, “Zu temporalen Momenten des Galaterbriefs: Beschneidungsfreiheit für Heidenchristen und Heilsgeschichte”, in: H. Omerzu and E.D. Schmid (eds.), Paulus und Petrus: Geschichte – Theologie – Rezeption: Festschrift für Friedrich Wilhelm Horn zu seinem 60. Geburtstag (Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte 48, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2016), pp. 101–136.
(2018), it is clear from Chrysostom’s exegesis of Galatians that he had a narrow interpretation of the concept “works of the law” but interpreted the concept “righteousness of God” in a flexible way. Luther, on the other hand, had a very specific interpretation of “righteousness of God” but a broad view of “works of the law”. Kalina Wojciechowska
511494 S. Grindheim, “Not Salvation History, but Salvation Territory: The Main Subject Matter of Galatians”, New Testament Studies 59:1 (2013), pp. 91–108.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688512000264
(2020) discusses justification in the light of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification and Luther’s commentaries on Romans (1516) and Galatians (1535), showing the differences and similarities between Luther’s views and those found in the declaration.
14. Ecclesiology
14.1 General studies
According to Anna Maria Schwemer
512495 T.D. Gordon, “Promise, Law, Faith: Covenant-Historical Reasoning in Galatians”, in: H.C. Kim (ed.), Galatians as Examined by Diverse Academics in 2012 (St. Andrews, Scotland) (Hermit Kingdom Studies in Christianity and Judaism 3, Newark NJ: The Hermit Kingdom Press, 2013), pp. 57–134.
(2000), Paul’s brief references to the heavenly city (in 4:24–26) and to heavenly citizenship (Philippians 3:20) form an integral part of his ecclesiology. These ideas represented shared knowledge amongst Christians (it was “urchristliches Gemeingut”) and therefor he did not need to elaborate. Furthermore, the polarity between Sinai and Zion is not only found in 4:21–31 but also in Hebrews 12:18–24. A. Katherine Grieb
513496 E.C. van Driel, “Christ in Paul’s Narrative: Salvation History, Apocalyptic Invasion, and Supralapsarian Theology”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 230–238.
(2005) draws attention to the disruptive nature of the grace in Christ whereby Paul, and others, were called by God to a new type of freedom and service. Günther H. Juncker
514497 M.A. Seifrid, “Paul, Luther, and Justification in Gal 2:15–21”, Westminster Theological Journal 65:2 (2003), pp. 215–230.
(2007) interprets “Israel” in Romans 9:6b as referring to the spiritual Israel (i.e., the church) and not to a faithful remnant from Israel. Juncker finds a similar tendency in Paul’s depiction of Abraham as spiritual father in Galatians 3 and in the typological interpretations of the patriarchs in Galatians 3 and of Isaac and Ishmael in 4:21–31. Troy W. Martin
515498 S. Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The “Lutheran” Paul and His Critics (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2004).
(2007) argues that, in spite of the absence of the term “holiness” in Galatians, the letter offers a continuous discussion of holiness in that the controversy about circumcision was essentially a controversy about the holiness of God’s people. Martin also works out the implications of Galatians’ view of circumcision for current believers. Dieter Sänger
516499 S. Chester, “When the Old Was New: Reformation Perspectives on Galatians 2:16”, The Expository Times 119:7 (2008), pp. 320–329.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014524608091090
(2011) describes Paul’s interpretative strategy in 4:21–31 as Christian identity formation by means of “Namenallegorese” (i.e., the allegorisation of names). In the first part, Paul develops metaphorical contrasts antithetically and in the second part, he constructs Christian identity narratively, in particular by focusing on the liberty that is based on Christ and that is experienced by means of faith. In a study of Paul’s letters as letters of worship, John Paul Heil
517500 S. Chester, “It Is no Longer I Who Live: Justification by Faith and Participation in Christ in Martin Luther’s Exegesis of Galatians”, New Testament Studies 55:3 (2009), pp. 315–337.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S002868850900023X
(2011) highlights the following aspects of ritual worship in the letter: worship in the letter opening (1:1–5), the link between the eucharist and worship in the Antioch incident (2:11–21), the effect of baptism on ethical worship (3:26–29, worked out in 4:1–11 and 5:16–6:10) and worship in the letter closing (6:11–18). Paul Trebilco
518501 M.L. Mattox, “Martin Luther’s Reception of Paul”, in: R.W. Holder (ed.), A Companion to Paul in the Reformation (Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 15, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2009), pp. 93–128.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004174924.i-660.18
(2011) is of the opinion that the term ἐκκλησία (“church”) was first used by the Hellenists in Early Christianity to refer to themselves because of its occurrence in the LXX. They used ἐκκλησία instead of συναγωγή (“synagogue”) because the latter was already used by Jewish communities to refer to themselves. By means of ἐκκλησία, the link to the people of God in the Hebrew Scriptures could be expressed and the distinction from Jewish communities was also clear. Stanley E. Porter
519502 J. Klösges, “Gnade wird gelebt, nicht doziert! Gedanken zur Rechtfertigungslehre Martin Luthers nach seinen Kommentaren zu Gal 2,16 auf der Folie des frühchristlichen Konflikts zwischen Paulus und den Gemeinden in Galatien”, Catholica 66:4 (2012), pp. 292–319.
(2012) discusses four important aspects of the way in which the church is depicted in Romans and Galatians: how Paul understands the church, how the church functions as a community, the role that the Spirit and spiritual gifts play in the church and rituals and practices such as baptism. Grant Macaskill
520503 M.W. Elliott, “Judaism, Reformation Theology, and Justification”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 143–158.
(2013) interprets the term “new creation” (used in 6:15) as an indication that Paul regarded the church as the new eschatological temple (having Isaiah as background) in which God restores cosmic order, thereby fulfilling the expectations that Isaiah had about Zion. According to Jeremy Punt
521504 G. Mombi, “The Death of Christ and Its Meaning for Melanesians from Paul’s Letter to the Galatians: From Fear to Freedom”, Melanesian Journal of Theology 29:2 (2013), pp. 79–162.
(2014), in Galatians, Paul is primarily concerned about the community to whom he writes the letter and its identity, and not so much about outsiders. Outsiders are mentioned in the letter, but Paul refers to them quite harshly. Zoran Devrnja
522505 J.A. Linebaugh, “The Christo-Centrism of Faith in Christ: Martin Luther’s Reading of Galatians 2.16, 19–20”, New Testament Studies 59:4 (2013), pp. 535–544.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688513000210
(2014) focuses on the way in which Paul established an identity for the church in Galatians and Romans, in particular by stressing the notion of Israel as the people of God, but now bearing the identity of the crucified and resurrected Christ. This new identity had to be expressed through a new ethos, attitude and responsibility towards outsiders. Michael Riccardi
523506 M. Grebe, “Jesus Christ: Victim or Victor? Revisiting Galatians 3:13 in Conversation with Karl Barth and Scripture”, Communio Viatorum 57:3 (2015), pp. 240–251. Originally published as: M. Grebe, “Jesus Christ: Victim or Victor? Revisiting Galatians 3:13 in Conversation with Karl Barth and Scripture”, in: H.C. Kim (ed.), Galatians as Examined by Diverse Academics in 2012 (St. Andrews, Scotland) (Hermit Kingdom Studies in Christianity and Judaism 3, Highland Park: The Hermit Kingdom Press, 2013), pp. 28–41.
(2014) disagrees with scholars who take Paul’s reference to Gentiles who believe in Christ as the “seed” of Abraham (in 3:29) as an indication that the church is the spiritual Israel. That Christ is the “seed” of Abraham means that all the Abrahamic blessings were fulfilled. This includes the national promises to Israel. G.K. Beale
524507 J.A. Cowan, “The Legal Significance of Christ’s Risen Life: Union with Christ and Justification in Galatians 2.17–20”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 40:4 (2018), pp. 453–472.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064x18767078
Jan Lambrecht does not agree with this proposal. See: J. Lambrecht, Intended Sense of Scripture: Fifty Brief Exegetical Notes (2019–2020) (Beau Basin: Scholars’ Press, 2020), pp. 269–273.
(2015) offers further evidence for the claim that Paul’s use of the term ἐκκλησία (“church”) is best understood in the light of the LXX and not in terms of a Graeco-Roman background. According to Ralph J. Korner
525508 J.A. Linebaugh, “The Grammar of the Gospel: Justification as a Theological Criterion in the Reformation and in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, Scottish Journal of Theology 71:3 (2018), pp. 287–307.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0036930618000339
(2017), an association describing itself as ἐκκλησία (“church”) would not have been perceived as anti-imperial in the New Testament era, even though it was counter oligarchic. Furthermore, Korner is of the opinion that the use of this term instead of “synagogue” does not necessarily imply that Paul and his congregations were moving away from Judaism. Maksimilijan Matjaž
526509 T.J. Bauer, “The Letter to the Galatians and the Concerns of Reformation: Luther’s Interpretation and Recent Discussions on Pauline Theology”, Theoforum 48:1/2 (2018), pp. 115–126.
https://doi.org/10.2143/tf.48.1.3286632
(2019) discusses Paul’s understanding of κοινωνία (“fellowship”) in 2:9 that played a key role in the agreement reached in Jerusalem. Matjaž emphasises that κοινωνία is based on recognising the truth of the gospel and that it has ecumenical and ethical implications.
14.2 Unity and equality
According to Pamela Eisenbaum
527510 E.M. Humphrey, “Meditating Upon God’s Righteousness with Chrysostom (and Luther)”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 29–43. In his response to Humphrey’s contribution (in the same volume), Peter Leithart suggests that Luther’s interpretation of the two concepts might perhaps not be so different from that of Chrysostom as Humphrey believes. See P.J. Leithart, “Response: Galatians Five Hundred Years Later”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 63–71.
(2000), who describes herself as a Jewish feminist, Paul had good intentions, but his views were used subsequently in an abominable way. Eisenbaum interprets 3:28 as articulating novel views on social relationships between people. Beverly Roberts Gaventa
528511 K. Wojciechowska, “‘Łaską … przez Wiarę’ – Lutra Koncepcja Usprawiedliwienia Grzesznika: Perspektywa Egzegetyczno-Hermeneutyczna”, Roczniki Teologiczne 67:7 (2020), pp. 85–109.
https://doi.org/10.18290/rt20677-6
(2000) believes that although Paul does not address women directly in Galatians and the speakers, audience and decisions are all male, this does not mean that one should abandon the letter, since it articulates a view of God’s new creation that is liberating for females and males. According to Andrea J. Mayer-Haas
529512 A.M. Schwemer, “Himmlische Stadt und himmlisches Bürgerrecht bei Paulus (Gal 4,26 und Phil 3,20)”, in: M. Hengel, S. Mittmann and A.M. Schwemer (eds.), La Cité de Dieu/Die Stadt Gottes: 3. Symposium Strasbourg, Tübingen, Uppsala. 19.–23. September 1998 in Tübingen (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.129, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000), pp. 195–243.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157217-3
(2001), the Antioch incident was caused by two opposing models of intra-church unity: a model based on covenant theology, presupposing the separation of Israel from other peoples, and a model based on the notion of a new universal fellowship brought about by Christ’s death (the view represented by Paul). Although Paul’s view was rejected by the majority at Antioch, in the long run it prevailed (after the demise of Jewish Christianity). Bernard C. Lategan
530513 A.K. Grieb, “‘The One Who Called You...’: Vocation and Leadership in the Pauline Literature”, Interpretation 59:2 (2005), pp. 154–165.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002096430505900205
(2002) draws attention to Paul’s use of history in Galatians. He offers an alternative perspective on Israel’s past in order to argue for a more inclusive understanding of its history so that he can motivate the equal status of Gentile believers in the congregation. In an investigation of texts on theocracy in Corinthians and Galatians, David W. Odell-Scott
531514 G.H. Juncker, “‘Children of Promise’: Spiritual Paternity and Patriarch Typology in Galatians and Romans”, Bulletin for Biblical Research 17:1 (2007), pp. 131–160.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26424196
(2003) shows that Paul criticised any notion of a structure of authority in the church and opposed such an idea by means of the metaphors of the church as the body of Christ and as the family of God. Timothy Wiarda
532515 T.W. Martin, “Circumcision in Galatia and the Holiness of God’s ecclesiae”, in: K.E. Brower and A. Johnson (eds.), Holiness and Ecclesiology in the New Testament (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2007), pp. 219–237.
(2003) identifies and critically assesses five different ways in which people use the Jerusalem Council as a model for the contemporary church. Wiarda concludes the investigation by emphasising the importance of sticking to the ideal of like-mindedness in the church. Gordon D. Fee
533516 D. Sänger, “Sara, die Freie – unsere Mutter: Namenallegorese als Interpretament christlicher Identitätsbildung in Gal 4,21–31”, in: R. Deines, J. Herzer and K.-W. Niebuhr (eds.), Neues Testament und hellenistich-jüdische Alltagskultur: Wechselseitige Wahrnehmungen: III. Internationales Symposium zum Corpus Judaeo-Hellenisticum Novi Testamenti, 21.–24. Mai 2009, Leipzig (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.274, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), pp. 213–239.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151563-7
(2004) highlights the implications of the “newness” of the new creation for Paul’s ecclesiology. Cultural structures still exist, but they should no longer be given any significance. Doug Heidebrecht
534517 J.P. Heil, The Letters of Paul as Rituals of Worship (Eugene OR: Cascade, 2011), pp. 64–74.
(2005) emphasises the importance of reading 3:28 in light of both the letter as a whole and related passages in the New Testament. Such a reading shows that this verse does not only refer to equality when it comes to salvation. Distinctions that are typical in society should also be addressed in the body of Christ. Tatha Wiley
535518 P. Trebilco, “Why Did the Early Christians Call Themselves ἡ ἐκκλησία?”, New Testament Studies 57:3 (2011), pp. 440–460.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688511000087
For a response, see G.H. van Kooten, “ἐκκλησία τοῦ Θεοῦ: The ‘Church of God’ and the Civic Assemblies (ἐκκλησίαι) of the Greek Cities in the Roman Empire: A Response to Paul Trebilco and
(2005) views the Galatian crisis from the perspective of Gentile women in the congregations. The gospel proclaimed by Paul’s opponents implied a departure from the gender equality (for example, manifested in baptism and leadership) associated with Paul’s gospel. Assisi Saldanha
536
New Testament Studies 58:4 (2012), pp. 522–548. Richard A. Horsley”,
https://doi.org/10.1017/S002868851200015X
(2006) points out that 3:26–29 does not merely address the status of Gentile Christians. It also implies that Gentiles and Jews are one in Christ – something that is objectively based on the faith of Christ. Unity between Jews and Gentiles in Christ is thus upheld. J. Nelson Jennings
537519 S.E. Porter, “The Church in Romans and Galatians”, in: J. Harrison and J.D. Dvorak (eds.), New Testament Church: The Challenge of Developing Ecclesiologies (McMaster Biblical Studies Series 1, Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2012), pp. 85–102.
(2009) offers a fresh reading of Romans and Galatians in Japan. Jennings stresses that Paul regarded the church as the covenant people of God, transcending individual cultures. For our times this implies taking a multi-ethnic ecclesiology seriously so that the destructive impact of nation states may be counteracted. According to Chad Harrington
538520 G. Macaskill, Union with Christ in the New Testament (New York NY/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 225–227.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684298.001.0001
(2010), Paul’s rhetoric in 2:16 has a sociological aim, namely, to move the church to unity. Justification is thus not only about forensic matters, but also about ecclesiological matters, about church unity. Moses-Valentine Afamefuna Chukwujekwu
539521 J. Punt, “Mission, Ethics, and Outsiders/Insiders in Galatians”, in: J. Kok, T. Nicklas, D.T. Roth and C.M. Hays (eds.), Sensitivity Towards Outsiders: Exploring the Dynamic Relationship between Mission and Ethics in the New Testament and Early Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.364, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 225–245.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157504-4
(2010) reads Galatians from the perspective of the relationship between gospel, church and culture, showing that the letter promotes the cultural autonomy of the people that are being evangelised, but that it also enhances the notion of unity in diversity. This implies that the gospel can be appropriated in different ways in different cultures in our time. Brigitte Kahl
540522 Z. Devrnja, “The Problem of the Identity of Covenant Community in Paul’s Epistles to the Galatians and the Romans”, Philotheos 14 (2014), pp. 215–223.
https://doi.org/10.5840/philotheos20141420
(2012) interprets the perspective of Galatians on the “Others” as follows: The letter de-hierarchicalises all types of polarities and envisages a new way of living together with the “Others”, i.e., living a life based on love: “This biblically based anti-imperial, anti-Occidental concept of unity is the central theme not only of Galatians 3:26–28, but of Galatians as a whole”.
541523 M. Riccardi, “The Seed of Abraham: A Theological Analysis of Galatians 3 and Its Implications for Israel”, The Master’s Seminary Journal 25:1 (2014), pp. 51–64.
In another contribution, Kahl
542524 G.K. Beale, “The Background of ἐκκλησία Revisited”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 38:2 (2015), pp. 151–168.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X15609206
(2013) draws attention to the way in which the Roman Emperor was depicted as world conqueror, god and father visually, for example in the Augustus Forum, and the different picture offered by Galatians. In Christ, people become part of a Messianic family, in which binary distinctions are replaced by hybrid horizontal relationships. In Paul’s terms: not Hagar but the free woman with her alternative metropole. Aaron Sherwood
543525 R.J. Korner, The Origin and Meaning of ekklēsia in the Early Jesus Movement (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 98, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2017).
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004344990
(2013) is of the opinion that ethnicity is one of the issues that Paul sweeps aside in 3:28 and that he focuses instead on social unity (not uniformity), in particular within the church. For William Sanger Campbell
544526 M. Matjaž, “Občestvo kljub Različnosti: Pavlovo Razumevanje Koinonie v Pismu Galačanom (Gal 2,9)”, Edinost in Dialog 74:1 (2019), pp. 175–193.
https://doi.org/10.34291/edinost/74/matjaz
(2013) it is important that the interpretation of 2:15–21 should be based on the previous section (vv. 11–14). If such an approach is followed, it becomes clear that the issue was not only the law but also unity amongst believers in spite of ethnicity. In a study of the relationship between the truth of the gospel and the unity of the church in the Pauline letters (amongst others, 2:5 and 14) and the Johannine writings, Hans-Christian Kammler
545527 P. Eisenbaum, “Is Paul the Father of Misogyny and Antisemitism?”, Cross Currents 50:4 (2000), pp. 506–524.
(2014) shows that “truth” is understood in a Christological sense and that it is generally accepted that the truth of the gospel constitutes unity in the church. Kammler also works out the implications of this insight for current oecumenical dialogues. One of the passages that Jae Won Lee
546528 B.R. Gaventa, “Is Galatians Just a ‘Guy Thing’? A Theological Reflection”, Interpretation 54:3 (2000), pp. 267–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/002096430005400304
(2015) uses to explain the politics of difference in Paul is 2:11–21. For Lee, this pericope is theologically the key passage in the letter, and it is clear that justification by faith was primarily concerned with equal relations between Jewish and Gentile believers. According to Thomas Söding
547529 A.J. Mayer-Haas, “Identitätsbewahrung, kirchliche Einheit und die ‘Wahrheit des Evangeliums’: Der sogenannte ‘antiochenische Zwischenfall’ im Spiegel von Gal 2,11–21”, in: J. Eckert, M. Schmidl and H. Steichele (eds.), Pneuma und Gemeinde: Christsein in der Tradition des Paulus und Johannes: Festschrift für Josef Hainz zum 65. Geburtstag (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 2001), pp. 123–148.
(2016), Galatians calls for a “fundamental ecumenism” (“Fundamentalökumene”) in our time, implying that unity is approached from the common task of witnessing to God. This witness should be polyphonic but should also have a common orientation to the canon. Yann Redalié
548530 B.C. Lategan, “Paul’s Use of History in Galatians: Some Remarks on His Style of Theological Argumentation”, Neotestamentica 36:1/2 (2002), pp. 121–130.
(2017) draws attention to Paul’s “intercultural ecclesiology”. He interpreted a basic baptismal tradition in different ways, depending on the particular situation. The three examples that Redalié discusses come from 3:23–29, 1 Corinthians 12:11–14 and Colossians 3:10. In a study of inter-church relationships in the Pauline letters (amongst others, Galatians), James T. Hughes
549531 D.W. Odell-Scott, Paul’s Critique of Theocracy: A/Theocracy in Corinthians and Galatians (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 250, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2003).
(2020) finds clear indications of a drive towards ecclesial solidarity (in belief and actions) and towards inter-church and trans-local relationships between congregations. This should inform the way in which churches interact nowadays. Mitzi J. Smith
550532 T. Wiarda, “The Jerusalem Council and the Theological Task”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 46:2 (2003), pp. 233–248.
(2020) challenges Paul (“talks back” to Paul) because he exploits Hagar, an enslaved woman, to promote a gospel proclaiming freedom. Even 3:28 is challenged, since it normalises ethnic, class and gender binaries. Furthermore, 4:21–5:1 shows that there still is a distinction between slave and free amongst believers.
14.3 Sacraments
Thomas A. Rand
551533 G.D. Fee, “Male and Female in the New Creation: Galatians 3:26–29”, in: R.W. Pierce and R.M. Groothuis (eds.), Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity without Hierarchy (Leicester/Downers Grove IL: Apollos/InterVarsity Press, 2004), pp. 172–185.
(2001) argues that in Galatians, Paul invoked rituals such as baptism and communion to signify the movement from the old age to the new age of the Spirit and to inculturate the gospel in the communal life of the readers. J. Albert Harill
552534 D. Heidebrecht, “Distinction and Function in the Church: Reading Galatians 3:28 in Context”, Direction 34:2 (2005), pp. 181–193.
(2002) believes that Paul’s reference to “putting on Christ” (3:27) is best understood in terms of the toga virilis coming-of-age ceremony in Roman household. Upon this occasion the youth were warned against succumbing to the flesh, a warning that Paul also gives in Galatians. Debbie Hunn
553535 T. Wiley, Paul and the Gentile Women: Reframing Galatians (New York NY/London: Continuum, 2005).
(2004) contends that Paul is not referring to water baptism in 3:27. A reference to Spirit baptism fits the context better.Derek Woodard-Lehman
554536 A. Saldanha, “‘The Faith of Christ’: The Objective Basis of the Unity between Jew and Greek”, Indian Theological Studies 43:3/4 (2006), pp. 425–469.
(2007) explores a dispersive universality not requiring others to be like oneself but by one identifying with them. This is linked to 3:26–28 and 2:19–20 as follows: “[B]aptism identifies the baptisand with Christ, inaugurates the new life of Christ living within, and initiates ongoing identification with others. The politics of baptismal identification is performative peace-making; a pneumasomatics of identity that is simultaneously a body politics and a politics of bodies.”
555537 J.N. Jennings, “Paul in Japan: A Fresh Reading of Romans and Galatians”, in: B.M. Howell and Z. Edwin (eds.), Power and Identity in the Global Church: Six Contemporary Cases (Pasadena CA: William Carey Library, 2009), pp. 27–54.
In a study on baptism in the first five centuries, Everett Ferguson
556538 C. Harrington, “Justification by the Faithfulness of Jesus Christ”, The Asbury Journal 65:2 (2010), pp. 7–25.
(2009) notes that 3:27 shows that what distinguishes Christian baptism from other similar rituals is the relationship to Christ – that one is baptised “into” Christ. Martin F. Connell
557539 M.-V.A. Chukwujekwu, “Gospel, Church and Cultures: Pauline Perspective in the Letter to the Galatians”, Bulletin of Ecumenical Theology 22 (2010), pp. 5–27.
(2011) discusses the ways in which Paul refers to clothing the body of Christ in his letters. Connell suggests that the reference to clothing in 3:27 is not merely metaphorical. It might also have referred to a ritual action whereby people dissociated their values from those of the rest of the world. In the light of Paul’s references to baptism and views about incorporation into Christ in 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Romans and Colossians, J. Ross Wagner
558540 B. Kahl, “Galatians: On Discomfort About Gender and Other Problems of Otherness”, in: L. Schottroff, M.-T. Wacker, C. Janssen, B. Wehn and M. Rumscheidt (eds.), Feminist Biblical Interpretation: A Compendium of Critical Commentary on the Books of the Bible and Related Literature (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2012), pp. 755–766. English version of: B. Kahl, “Der Brief an die Gemeinden in Galatien: Vom Unbehagen der Geschlechter und anderen Problemen des Andersseins”, in: L. Schottroff, M.-T. Wacker, C. Janssen and B. Wehn (eds.), Kompendium feministische Bibelauslegung (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn, 1999, 2nd corrected edition), pp. 603–611.
(2011) draws attention to the fact that it is the identity of the human Jesus Christ that determines the identity of the redeemed. They become one because they are united with him. According to Teresa Kuo-Yu Tsui
559541 Op. cit., p. 764.
(2012), in 3:27 (and in Romans 6:3), Paul refers to baptism apocalyptically in the sense that baptism points forward to the final transformation, the resurrection, that is based on the apocalyptic Christ event. Gitte Buch-Hansen
560542 B. Kahl, “Krieg, Maskulinität und der imperiale Gottvater: Das Augustusforum und die messianische Re-Imagination von ‘Hagar’ im Galaterbrief”, in: U.E. Eisen, C. Gerber and A. Standhartinger (eds.), Doing Gender – Doing Religion: Fallstudien zur Intersektionalität im frühen Judentum, Christentum und Islam (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.302, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013), pp. 273–300.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152368-7
(2014) discusses baptism and notions on generation/genealogy in Galatians, showing how Paul navigates between Jewish notions of genealogy and Hellenistic ideas about generation, in particular Aristotelian ideas about generation as illustrated in De generatione animalium. This Aristotelian notion is combined with the idea that Christ literally became Abraham’s seed. Stephen Richard Turley
561543 A. Sherwood, Paul and the Restoration of Humanity in Light of Ancient Jewish Traditions (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 82, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2013), pp. 217–221.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004235472
(2015) investigates references to baptism and meals in Galatians and 1 Corinthians from the perspective of ritual theory. According to Turley, these rituals were primarily revelatory in that they revealed the coming of the Messianic age by means of the bodies of the believers who participated in such rituals. Joshua Garroway
562544 W.S. Campbell, “Unity in the Community: Rereading Galatians 2:15–21”, in: D.J. Downs and M.L. Skinner (eds.), The Unrelenting God: God’s Action in Scripture: Essays in Honor of Beverly Roberts Gaventa (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2013), pp. 226–241.
(2016) is of the view that Paul did not replace circumcision with baptism. He reinterpreted circumcision (an initiatory rite into Judaism) in the sense that he believed that circumcision was achieved by means of baptism. Štefan Paluchník
563545 H.-C. Kammler, “Die Wahrheit des Evangeliums und die Einheit der Kirche: Exegetische Überlegungen zu ihrem sachlichen Verhältnis”, Kerygma und Dogma 60:2 (2014), pp. 126–152.
https://doi.org/10.13109/kedo.2014.60.2.126
(2016) examines the way in which Paul handled older traditions. One of the examples that are discussed is 3:26–29, in which case Paluchník accepts that Paul made use of a pre-Pauline baptismal tradition. Christoph Heil
564546 J.W. Lee, Paul and the Politics of Difference: A Contextual Study of the Jewish-Gentile Difference in Galatians and Romans (Cambridge: James Clarke & Pickwick Publications, 2015), pp. 107–135.
(2016) thinks the interpretation of rituals in Early Christianity was influenced by notions of piety in the mystery cults. In Galatians, this can be seen in Paul’s reference to circumcision as castration (5:12), having as its background the emasculation associated with the Cybele cult, and the clothing referred to in the context of baptism (3:27), having as its background clothing metaphors in Hellenistic mystery cults. Allan J. McNicol
565547 T. Söding, “Streiten verbindet: Der Galaterbrief als Wegweiser der Ökumene”, in: U. Luz, T. Söding and S. Vollenweider (eds.), Exegese – Ökumenisch engagiert: Der ‘Evangelisch-Katholische Kommentar’ in der Diskussion über 500 Jahre Reformation (Ostfildern/Göttingen: Patmos Verlag/Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), pp. 89–98.
https://doi.org/10.13109/9783788731823.89
(2017) highlights the link between baptism and moral life in Galatians. Paul understood Christian life as “new creation” expressed in living according to “the law of Christ”. Baptism was an integral event in this enterprise. Jeremy Wade Barrier
566548 Y. Redalié, “Paolo, un’Ecclesiologia Interculturale?”, Protestantesimo 72:4 (2017), pp. 355–367.
(2020) believes that the Jews in Galatia regarded circumcision as a talisman protecting them from harm and that they viewed Paul as a witch bringing evil to their community. Paul’s defence was that baptism, not circumcision, protected them from the evil eye.
14.4 Ministry
Anthony Towey
567549 J.T. Hughes, “Inter-Church Relationships in Paul’s Epistles”, The Global Anglican 134:3 (2020), pp. 251–261.
(2009) highlights the pastoral implications of the Damascus event, in particular three key insights that transformed Paul’s ministry (and that may be applied to our current context): the awareness that he had persecuted God’s church, meeting the Risen Christ and a desire to bring the gospel to outsiders. Noting that Galatians has often been used in the past to foster division amongst believers, Marion L.S. Carson
568550 M.J. Smith, “Hagar’s Children Still Ain’t Free: Paul’s Counterterror Rhetoric, Constructed Identity, Enslavement, and Galatians 3:28”, in: M.J. Smith and J.Y. Choi (eds.), Minoritized Women Reading Race and Ethnicity: Intersectional Approaches to Constructed Identity and Early Christian Texts (Lanham MD: Lexington Books, 2020), pp. 45–70.
(2015) suggests that one should rather view Paul as tackling “immature religion” in the letter. In the current context, one may follow his arguments but not the divisive approach that he used. Marcus A. Mininger
569551 T.A. Rand, “Set Free and Set Right: Ritual, Theology, and the Inculturation of the Gospel in Galatia”, Worship 75:5 (2001), pp. 453‑468.
(2016) appropriates the message of 2:2, 2:11–14 and Philippians 1:12–18 for our current times as follows: One of the best ways to test one’s God-centredness in the ministry is the way one handles conflict with other people, in particular with peers. Michael F. Bird and John Anthony Dunne
570552 J.A. Harrill, “Coming of Age and Putting on Christ: The toga virilis Ceremony, Its Paraenesis, and Paul’s Interpretation of Baptism in Galatians”, Novum Testamentum 44:3 (2002), pp. 252–277.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156853602320249473
(2017) describe Paul’s ministry in Galatians as “pastoring with a big stick” and draw attention to two important issues that may help one to understand his ministry in this letter better: his role as heresiologist and his maternal attitude toward the readers (4:12ff.).
14.5 Offices
N.H. Taylor
571553 D. Hunn, “The Baptism of Galatians 3:27: A Contextual Approach”, The Expository Times 115:11 (2004), pp. 372–375.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001452460411501103
(2003) investigates the ways in which Paul and his rivals defined apostleship in the conflicts reflected in Galatians and the Corinthian letters. Taylor finds no common conception of apostleship underlying the conflicts. Claims for legitimacy were based on different criteria. Boris Repschinski
572554 D. Woodard-Lehman, “One in Christ Who Lives Within: Dispersive Universality and the Pneuma-Somatics of Identity”, The Bible & Critical Theory 3:3 (2007), pp. 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.2104/bc070039
(2010) points out that Paul formulates his criticism of the Galatians in the light of Hellenistic notions of friendship. Accordingly, he depicts his ministry as an apostle as that of someone operating as an equal of the Galatians whereas the best that his opponents can offer is a patron-client relationship (and the worst a situation of spiritual slavery). Céline Rohmer
573555 Op. cit., p. 1.
(2019) argues that although the writers of the New Testament do not know the notion of synodality (literally, “having a common way”) their writings show what it means to be on a journey with Christ, an experience giving rise to true synodal events. The plurality of voices in this regard (amongst others, Galatians 2) gives one a pragmatic freedom in Christ regarding synodal matters in the current context.
15. Christian existence and spirituality
15.1 Studies based on the letter or parts of the letter
In a study of “in Christ”, “in the Spirit” and related expressions in Pauline letters, Andrie du Toit
574556 E. Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2009), pp. 147–148.
(2000) observes that although one finds some examples of ecstatic forms of mysticism in the letters, Paul mostly uses such expressions to refer to the daily experience of God’s presence in believers through the presence of Christ and the Spirit. Alain Gignac
575557 M.F. Connell, “Clothing the Body of Christ: An Inquiry About the Letters of Paul”, Worship 85:2 (2011), pp. 128–146.
(2000) draws attention to Paul as a master and a teacher of an initiation process that transformed his readers by means of rhetorical techniques. His letters can still transform readers today. Scot McKnight
576558 J.R. Wagner, “Baptism ‘into Christ Jesus’ and the Question of Universalism in Paul”, Horizons in Biblical Theology 33:1 (2011), pp. 45–61.
https://doi.org/10.1163/019590811X571715
(2000) investigates the identity of the “I” depicted as dying in 2:20. McKnight rejects two views, a universalistic view (that the “I” is everybody) and an autobiographical view (that the “I” is Paul) and argues for understanding it as referring to the “I’s” of Paul and Peter as Jewish believers. According to Piotr Kasiłowski
577559 T. Kuo-Yu Tsui, “‘Baptized into His Death’ (Rom 6,3) and ‘Clothed with Christ’ (Gal 3,27): The Soteriological Meaning of Baptism in Light of Pauline Apocalyptic”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 88:4 (2012), pp. 395–417.
https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.88.4.2957935
(2001), the essence of Christian existence as depicted in 2:16 and 19–20 may be summarised as follows: justification as a gift of God, Christ as the foundation of new life, a breaking with the law and the death of one’s “I”. Michael J. Gorman
578560 G. Buch-Hansen, “Paulus i Aristoteles’ Hønsegård: Dåb og Genealogi i Galaterbrevet”, Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 77:1 (2014), pp. 9–26.
(2001) explains Paul’s spirituality as a “narrative spirituality” because it is based on Christ’s character as depicted in the story of his cruciform death, ending in exaltation. Paul modelled and taught such a spirituality of cruciformity to believers. Gorman highlights four important concepts, cruciform faith, love, power and hope, which are to be expressed in communities of cruciformity. Stanley P. Saunders
579561 S.R. Turley, The Ritualized Revelation of the Messianic Age: Washings and Meals in Galatians and 1 Corinthians (Library of New Testament Studies 544, London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2015).
(2002) shows how eschatological rhetoric had a formative function in the spirituality of Early Christianity, by reshaping their view of space and time and by “learning” Christ. In the case of Galatians, the relationship between apocalyptic eschatology and a spirituality of freedom is of particular note. Hans-Martin Barth
580562 J. Garroway, “Engendering Judaism: Paul, Baptism, and Circumcision”, in: G. Boccaccini and C.A. Segovia (eds.), Paul the Jew: Rereading the Apostle as a Figure of Second Temple Judaism (Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press, 2016), pp. 219–244.
(2002) compares the Christian notion of personal identity (as reflected in 2:20) and the Buddhist notion of “non-self”. Whereas Buddhism invites people to find “emptiness” and not be person-centred anymore, this verse refers to a grateful transformation of the “I” to a true “I” established by Christ. Ladislav Tichý
581563 Š. Paluchník, “Der Apostel Paulus und die älteren christlichen Traditionen”, Communio Viatorum 58:1 (2016), pp. 55–76.
(2004) argues that Paul’s statement in 2:20a that Christ is in him, is one of the ways in which the close relationship between baptised believers and Christ is expressed by him. This expression also has a personal dimension in that he relies on his own experience of the presence of Christ. According to Pedro Mendoza Magallón
582564 C. Heil, “Beschneidung und Taufe im Galaterbrief: Zur Bedeutung der Mysterienkulte in einem frühchristlichen Grundsatzstreit”, Keryx 4 (2016), pp. 87–98.
(2005), “being crucified with Christ” (a notion found only in 2:15–21 and in Romans 6:5–11) is the centre of Paul’s message and depicts the fundamental situation of believers. They have to identify fully with Christ’s loving redemption and cannot continue to live in sin anymore. In a study of spiritual maturity and maturation in the undisputed Pauline letters, James G. Samra
583565 A.J. McNicol, “Baptism and the Moral Life”, Christian Studies 29 (2017), pp. 33–46.
(2006) finds a maturational aspect in Paul’s view of his mission in Galatians (1:17–2:10 and 4:8–20), as well as an emphasis on conformity to Christ’s image, with the process of spiritual transformation depicted as a transformation to the image of Christ (Galatians 3–4). Roberto Lopes de Souza
584566 J.W. Barrier, Witch Hunt in Galatia: Magic, Medicine, and Ritual and the Occasion of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (Paul in Critical Contexts, Lanham MD/New York NY/London: Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2020).
(2008) investigates Paul’s mysticism in Galatians and draws attention to Paul’s gospel, his personal detachment as a result of having been crucified with Christ (2:19 and 6:14), and his intimate union with Christ. This mysticism gave rise to an objective loving of other believers in the daily life of the Christian community and table-fellowship without any distinction. In the light of 5:25, Domingos Terra
585567 A. Towey, “Damascus and Pastoral Ministry”, in: M.A. Hayes (ed.), In Praise of Paul (London: St Pauls, 2009), pp. 48–57.
(2008) points out that the nature of Christian experience is quite often misinterpreted in that people do not realise that the dominant aspect to be grasped for a true understanding of spirituality is an emphasis on God’s primacy and sovereignty and not on social and cultural expressions. One of the issues that Richard Valantasis
586568 M.L.S. Carson, “Grown up Religion: Polemic and Pastoral Practice in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, The Expository Times 127:3 (2015), pp. 105–113.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014524614535155
(2008) investigates in a study of ancient and modern ascetism is “competing ascetic subjectivities” in Galatians. Valantasis identifies three types of subjectivity in the letter: a subjectivity of the natural subject, a subjectivity of dominant Judaism at Paul’s time and a spiritual/pneumatic subjectivity of a smaller Jewish group within a larger Jewish religious/social setup. According to Valantasis, in Galatians, Paul serves as an example of the third type of subjectivity. In a contribution on the symbolism of mountains in Biblical spirituality, Richard T. France
587569 M.A. Mininger, “A God-Centered Ministry and Responses to Conflict between Peers: Perspectives from the Apostle Paul”, Mid-America Journal of Theology 27 (2016), pp. 123–136.
(2008) points out the contrasting ideologies associated with Sinai and Zion and the way in which this contrast is developed in the New Testament, amongst others in Galatians, in which case one finds a contrast between spiritual slavery and freedom in Christ. D. Francois Tolmie
588570 M.F. Bird and J.A. Dunne, “Pastoring with a Big Stick: Paul as Pastor in Galatians”, in: B.S. Rosner, A.S. Malone and T.J. Burke (eds.), Paul as Pastor (London: T & T Clark/Bloomsbury, 2017), pp. 71–82.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567677938.ch-006
(2011) offers an overview of the spirituality of Galatians in terms of Kees Waaijman’s
589571 N.H. Taylor, “Conflict as Context for Defining Identity: A Study of Apostleship in the Galatian and Corinthian Letters”, HTS Teologiese Studies 59:3 (2003), pp. 915–945.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v59i3.680
Also available in: N.H. Taylor, “Apostolic Identity and the Conflicts in Corinth and Galatia”, in: S.E. Porter (ed.), Paul and His Opponents (Pauline Studies 2, Leiden: Brill, 2005), pp. 99–127.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047416074_007
approach to spirituality by discussing the way in which (1) the divine-human relational and (2) the transformation processes are reflected in the letter. Dieter Sänger
590572 B. Repschinski, “Gemeindekrise und Apostelamt im Galaterbrief”, Zeitschrift für Katholische Theologie 132:3 (2010), pp. 312–331.
(2011) describes Paul’s interpretative strategy in 4:21–31 as Christian identity formation by means of “Namenallegorese” (i.e., the allegorisation of names). In the first part, Paul develops metaphorical contrasts antithetically and in the second part, he constructs Christian identity narratively, in particular by focusing on the liberty that is based on Christ and that is experienced by means of faith.Rollin A. Ramsaran
591573 C. Rohmer, “De la tradition synodale à l’événement synodal ou comment la Bible interroge la pratique”, Recherches de Science Religieuse 107:2 (2019), pp. 209–224.
https://doi.org/10.3917/rsr.192.0207
(2012) investigates “in Christ” and “Christ in” as expressions of religious experience in Galatians and finds that interior religious experience plays an important role in the letter, in particular in the case of “Christ in” texts such as 1:16 and 2:20. Ramsaran also highlights the link between “Christ in” texts and “in Christ” texts, language of “belonging” and the presence of the Spirit – all regarded as giving rise to ethical actions. According to Daniel Marguerat
592574 A. du Toit, “‘In Christ’, ‘in the Spirit’ and Related Prepositional Phrases: Their Relevance for a Discussion on Pauline Mysticism”, Neotestamentica 34:2 (2000), pp. 287–298.
(2013), Paul may be described as a mystic, but he did not practise an evasive type of spirituality or dismiss the burdens of life. His Christic mysticism was motivated by his theological interpretation of the cross, implying a fundamental incarnation of God. In the case of Galatians, Marguerat considers 1:15b–16 and 2:19–20. In a study of the notion of union with Christ in the New Testament, Grant Macaskill
593575 A. Gignac, “Paul le passeur, hier et aujourd’hui: Pédagogie rhétorique et lecture initiatique”, Science et Esprit 52:1 (2000), pp. 61–85.
(2013) discusses 2:19–20 and 4:5. In the first case, Macaskill highlights the total transformation of identity depicted and suggests that this idea might have been influenced by a reflection on the sacraments. In the second case, Macaskill highlights the fact that Paul specifically links adoption to receiving the Spirit. Furthermore, the importance of God’s fatherhood in this context is stressed, as well as the fact that Jesus’ sonship and his movement from a position of minority (under the law) to majority serve as the basis of adoption on the sacraments. D. Francois Tolmie
594576 S. McKnight, “The Ego and ‘I’: Galatians 2:19 in New Perspective”, Word & World 20:3 (2000), pp. 272–280.
(2013) identifies three core elements of the spiritual activity of discernment (reflection, choice and the relationship to God) and discusses several references to discernment in Galatians in 2:1–10, 2:11–21, 3:1–5 and 5:13–6:10. Pieter G.R. de Villiers
595577 P. Kasiłowski, “Życie Chrześcijanina (Ga 2,16.19–20)”, Studia Bobolanum 1:1 (2001), pp. 93–116.
(2014) points out that scholars tend to ignore the importance of love in Galatians because of the polemical nature of the letter. De Villiers shows how important love in the letter is by discussing divine love (as the source of God’s salvific, transformative deeds and as divine characteristic) and love as the distinguishing mark of the believing congregation. De Villiers also works out the implications of love for the ethos and ethics of believers. Eliezer González
596578 M.J. Gorman, Cruciformity: Paul’s Narrative Spirituality of the Cross (Grand Rapids MI/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2001).
(2014) believes that the notion of metamorphosis occupies a central place in Paul’s thought. (The term μεταμορφόω [“change”] is used in Romans 12:2 and 2 Corinthians 3:18, μορφή [“form”] in Philippians 2:6–7 and μορφόω [“form”] in Galatians 4:19.) González summarises Paul’s view on the matter as follows: “[T]he agent of metamorphosis is God, and the object for the transformation of humanity is Christ-likeness.”
597579 S.P. Saunders, “‘Learning Christ’: Eschatology and Spiritual Formation in New Testament Christianity”, Interpretation 56:2 (2002), pp. 155–167.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002096430005600204
In a study of 4:4–7 and Romans 8:14–17, Florin Bejenaru
598580 H.-M. Barth, “‘Ich lebe, aber nicht mehr ich...’: Christlicher Glaube und personale Identität”, Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 44:2 (2002), pp. 174–188.
https://doi.org/10.1515/nzst.2002.010
(2014) stresses the role of the Spirit in experiencing divine childhood of God. The Spirit creates the awareness of childhood of God in believers and proclaims it through the intense prayer “Abba! Father!” coming from them and the Spirit. Whereas a slowness to change spiritually is usually linked to sin or to the world, flesh and the devil, Steven L. Porter
599581 L. Tichý, “Christ in Paul: The Apostle Paul’s Relation to Christ Viewed through Gal. 2.20a”, in: J. Mrázek and J. Roskovec (eds.), Testimony & Interpretation: Early Christology in Its Judeo-Hellenistic Milieu: Studies in Honor of Petr Pokorný (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Studies 272, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2004), pp. 40–48.
(2014) argues that a relational understanding of “flesh” as something resisting the Spirit offers a better explanation. Thus “flesh” should not simply be understood as the inclination to sin, but rather as the inclination to resist the Spirit and to live independently. This implies that sanctification is not primarily a matter of improved willpower, but rather of more dependence on God. Robert James Mason
600582 P. Mendoza Magallón, Estar Crucificado Juntamente con Cristo: El Nuevo Status del Creyente en Cristo: Estudio Exegético-Teológico de Gal 2.15–21 y Rom 6.5–11 (Tesi Gregoriana: Serie Teologia 122, Roma: Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 2005).
(2014) highlights the notion of “eschatological ascetism” in 3:28: “Paul’s ascetic proclivity followed a coenobitic path of communal relationships with all likeminded followers of Jesus – a community of individuals united in their endeavor to deemphasize culturally generated social constructions of importance.”
601583 J.G. Samra, Being Conformed to Christ in Community: A Study of Maturity, Maturation and the Local Church in the Undisputed Pauline Epistles (Library
Kevin J. Vanhoozer
602
of New Testament Studies 320, London: T & T Clark, 2006), pp. 212–233.
(2015) interprets the notion of putting on Christ (3:27) from the perspective of a theodramatic approach to theology. Doctrine helps believers to understand what they are in Christ and directs them to participate in him and act their parts in the redemption drama. Hanna Górska
603584 R.L. de Souza, “A Mística na Epístola aos Gálatas: ‘Já não Sou Eu Que Vivo, Mas é Cristo que Vive em Mim’”, Estudos Bíblicos 26:97 (2008), pp. 70–85.
(2019) discusses the relationship between adoption as children of God and spiritual liberty according to 4:1–7 and Romans 8:12–17. Believers do not merely receive spiritual liberty but also a new relationship with God. They have to accept this gift, but also have to follow the guidance of the Spirit in order to avoid losing their spiritual liberty. Thomas McCall
604585 D. Terra, “Experiência Cristã: Especificidade e Equívocos: A Propósito da Expressão ‘Viver pelo Espírito’ (Gal 5,25)”, Didaskalia 38:1 (2008), pp. 89–112.
(2020) discusses various interpretations of Paul’s statement that he has been co-crucified with Christ (2:19) but opts for Chrysostom’s interpretation. Through baptism, believers are unified with Christ and then live in such a way that their members are spiritually mortified. Ulrich H.J. Körtner
605586 R. Valantasis, The Making of the Self: Ancient and Modern Asceticism (Eugene OR: Cascade, 2008).
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1cgf9xc
(2020) works out the implications of 2:20 for Christian self-liberation. By accepting sinners, Christ liberates them from themselves so that they can accept themselves. This implies that they are dialectically liberated from themselves but also towards themselves. Robert J. Gench
606587 R.T. France, “A Tale of Two Mountains: Mountains in Biblical Spirituality”, Rural Theology 6:2 (2008), pp. 117–125.
https://doi.org/10.1179/rut_2008_6_2_005
(2020) offers a discussion of “the fruit of the Spirit” (5:22–23) as an expression of a cruciform spirituality – something that should not only be personal but should also have a very definite public, political, embodiment.
15.2 Wirkungsgeschichte
Friederike Nüssel
607588 D.F. Tolmie, “The Spirituality of the Letter to the Galatians”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 15 (2011), pp. 167–182.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v31i1S.10
(2002) interprets Christian self-conception in 2:20 on the basis of Luther’s interpretation of the verse and a Lutheran Christology. The new self-understanding of the believer depicted here is one in which the “I” is not dissolved through fellowship with Christ but in which the “I” differs from the old “I” outside of Christ. Samuel Fernández
608589 K. Waaijman, Spirituality: Forms, Foundations, Methods (Leuven/Paris/Dudley: Peeters, 2002).
(2005) discusses the way in which Alberto Hurtado, a Jesuit saint, interpreted 2:20. According to Fernández, Hurtado’s interpretation of this verse (the verse that he cites most in his writings) helps one to understand his spirituality. The notion of being in Christ was integrated with that of recognising him in others, especially the poor. Maria Isabel Barbeito Carneiro
609590 D. Sänger, “Sara, die Freie – unsere Mutter: Namenallegorese als Interpretament christlicher Identitätsbildung in Gal 4,21–31”, in: R. Deines, J. Herzer and K.-W. Niebuhr (eds.), Neues Testament und hellenistich-jüdische Alltagskultur: Wechselseitige Wahrnehmungen: III. Internationales Symposium zum Corpus Judaeo-Hellenisticum Novi Testamenti, 21.–24. Mai 2009, Leipzig (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.274, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), pp. 213–239.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151563-7
(2007) gives an overview of the way in which Song of Songs and Galatians were appropriated for understanding union and transformation of the soul in God by some Franciscans and Carmelites during the Early Modern Era: Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Cecilia del Nacimiento, Antonio Sobrino and Estefanía de la Encarnación. David T. Ejenobo
610591 R.A. Ramsaran, “‘In Christ’ and ‘Christ in’ as Expressions of Religious Experience: Testing the Waters in Galatians”, in: C. Shantz and R.A. Werline (eds.), Experientia, Volume 2: Linking Text and Experience (SBL – Early Judaism and Its Literature 35, Atlanta GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012), pp. 161–180.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt32bzkm.12
(2009) investigates three passages in Paul’s letters (1 Corinthians 12:3; Galatians 2:20 and Romans 8:9), highlighting the importance of the mystical element in Paul’s view of the Spirit. This is appropriated for the African context as follows: If this aspect is taught more often, the Christian religion will be accepted more readily. James O. Adeyanju
611592 D. Marguerat, “Paul the Mystic”, in: J. Krans, B.J. Lietaert Peerbolte, P.-B. Smit and A.W. Zwiep (eds.), Paul, John, and Apocalyptic Eschatology: Studies in Honour of Martinus C. de Boer (Novum Testamentum Supplements 149, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2013), pp. 76–93.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004250369_007
(2010) explains how Nigerian churches can play a role in the rebranding of Nigeria by taking the view of spirituality expressed in 5:16–18 seriously. This would help to turn around socio-economic and political problems in the country. Carolyn Muessig
612593 G. Macaskill, Union with Christ in the New Testament (New York NY/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 220–221.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684298.001.0001
(2013) discusses the evolution in the interpretation of the stigmata that Paul mentions in 6:17: an invisible mark that bishops or priests received at ordination (seventh century), a stigmatic spirituality that could be achieved by vows and penances (Peter Damian), the marks/wounds that the crusaders bore in or as result of battle (twelfth century), and, finally, a pious superlative that could be achieved by devout lay people (thirteenth century). In a book published in 2020, Muessig
613594 D.F. Tolmie, “Discernment in the Letter to the Galatians”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 17 (2013), pp. 156–171.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v32i2S.12
(2020) offers a comprehensive overview of the way in which the stigmata have been interpreted. Amongst other things, Muessig shows that women more frequently reported having stigmata than men, and that the perception of stigmata was later influenced by doctrinal differences between Catholics and Protestants. Marshall Welch
614595 P.G.R. de Villiers, “Transformation in Love in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 19 (2014), pp. 143–163.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2S.8
(2013) designed a curriculum based on 5:22–23 for developing Christian men spiritually. It was tested in practical situations and it was found that it can be used successfully by pastoral staff and lay leaders. Boris Repschinski
615596 E. González, “Paul’s Use of Metamorphosis in Its Graeco-Roman and Jewish Contexts”, DavarLogos 13:1 (2014), pp. 57–76.
(2013) compares the ways in which Paul and Ignatius of Loyola reflected on events in their life as an opportunity to recognise the presence of God. Both of them emphasised God’s will without offering systematic autobiographies or memoires. There are also differences: for example, for Paul, his own life was a proof of the truth of the gospel and his experiences thus had argumentative value (as may be seen in 1:10–2:14) – something that does not happen in the case of Ignatius. Elma Cornelius
616597 Op. cit., p. 75.
(2014) explores the relevance of 5:16–25 for the current debate on spiritual excellence. Cornelius shows that virtues used by Paul to characterise a life filled by the Spirit are similar to what is nowadays regarded as having a life that is spiritually mature. Thus, living a life filled by the Spirit helps one to manage problems, changes the way in which one does business, and contributes to individuals, families, companies and nations being successful and becoming whole. Michael H. Crosby
617598 F. Bejenaru, Il Gridare “Abba, Padre!”: Spirito Santo e Filiazione Divina, Agire Umano e Proclamazione Liturgica: Studio Esegetico-Teologico di Gal
(2015) offers an appropriation of “the fruit of the Spirit” (5:22–23) as an expression of Pauline mysticism for the current context. Crosby believes that such a mystical theology will help to cross the divide between episcopal nomists and other Catholics who are not satisfied with institutional Catholicism. Leslie T. Hardin
618
(Studi e Ricerche: Sezione Biblica, Assisi: Cittadella, 2014). 4,4–7 e Rm 8,14–17
(2015) investigates the viability of Pauline spirituality in a digital age. Hardin offers an overview of the spiritual practices that Paul engaged in, highlighting that spirituality was more than mere experience for him. It entailed everyday practices under the guidance of the Spirit – an approach that can still work in the current context. Josias da Costa Junior
619599 S.L. Porter, “The Gradual Nature of Sanctification: σάρξ as Habituated, Relational Resistance to the Spirit”, Themelios 39:3 (2014), pp. 470–483.
(2015) discusses Heidegger’s The Phenomenology of Religious Life, in particular the way in which Heidegger understands the notions of hermeneutics, phenomenology and facticity. Furthermore, the focus falls on mystical religious experience. P. Adam McClendon
620600 R.J. Mason, “Galatians 3:28: An Aspect of Eschatological Ascetism in Paul”, in: D.L. Matson and K.C. Richardson (eds.), One in Christ Jesus: Essays on Early Christianity and “All That Jazz”, in Honor of S. Scott Bartchy (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2014), pp. 222–239.
(2015) looks critically at contemporary Christian spiritualities in the light of the spirituality of Galatians. McClendon approaches the spirituality of the letter from four angles: the central position of the cross, the central position of Christ, the continued tension caused by the flesh, and how faith is authenticated according to the letter. Matthew Rosebrock
621601 Op. cit., p. 237.
(2016) shows that the concepts oratio, meditatio and tentatio (“prayer”, “meditation” and “temptation”) are not only pivotal in Luther’s theology (as illustrated in his lectures on Galatians) but also had an influence on artistic manifestations of the Reformation, as is evident from some of the altarpieces created by Lucas Cranach the Elder. Samuel J. Dubbelman
622602 K.J. Vanhoozer, “Putting on Christ: Spiritual Formation and the Drama of Discipleship”, Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care 8:2 (2015), pp. 147–171.
https://doi.org/10.1177/193979091500800203
(2016) suggests that Luther borrowed the expression tenebra et caligo fidei (“the darkness and cloud of faith”; used in his 1535 commentary on Galatians) from Dionysius the Areopagite. Thus, Luther appropriated expressions associated with mystical theologians in order to explain the great difference between gospel and law. Andrea D. Saner
623603 H. Górska, “Wolność Synów Bożych na Podstawie Rz 8,12–17 i Ga 4,1–7”, Ruch Biblijny i Liturgiczny 72:3 (2019), pp. 197–209.
https://doi.org/10.21906/rbl.3617
(2017) offers a spiritual perspective on the depiction of Hagar in Christian theology. On the one hand, she should be “cast out” (4:30) in the sense that human effort (without the Holy Spirit) is to be rejected, but on the other hand, she also represents the effect that transformation by the Spirit may have. Nancy Carol James
624604 T. McCall, “Crucified with Christ: The Ego and the Omega”, Journal of Analytic Theology 8 (2020), pp. 1–25.
https://doi.org/10.12978/jat.2020-8.190718120211
(2017) published the first English translation of and introduction to the French mystic Jeanne Guyon’s commentaries on Galatians, Ephesians and Colossians, with explanations and reflections for the interior life. Stephen J. Chester
625605 U.H.J. Körtner, “‘Nicht mehr ich’ (Gal 2,20): Erwägungen zum Begriff der Selbstbefreiung im Anschluss an Paulus”, in: M. Bauspieß, J.U. Beck and F. Portenhauser (eds.), Bestimmte Freiheit: Festschrift für Christof Landmesser zum 60. Geburtstag (Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte 64, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2020), pp. 291–308.
(2018) points out that Joseph Lortz and Jared Wickes – the two most important twentieth-century Roman Catholic scholars of Luther – have opposite views of his stance towards religious experience. Chester argues that these opposing views are caused by a polarity in Luther’s views in this regard, as can be seen from his exegesis of 4:6. Norman K. Swazo
626606 R.J. Gench, The Cross Examen: A Spirituality for Activists (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2020).
(2019) discusses Heidegger’s interpretation of Galatians and points out that for Heidegger, faith as lived experience and recognising “the Christ” are essential. However, recognising him needs phenomenological clarification. On the basis of Pauline pneumatology (as reflected amongst others in Galatians), Wei Hua
627607 F. Nüssel, “‘Ich lebe, doch nun nicht ich, sondern Christus lebt in mir’ (Gal 2,20a): Dogmatische Überlegungen zur Rede vom ‘Sein in Christus’”, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 99:4 (2002), pp. 480-502.
(2020) argues that the Spirit can transform a culture receiving the Christian gospel. Accordingly, it is possible that Chinese commemorating rites can be renewed and practised by Chinese Christians as a type of humanising etiquette.
16. Ethics
16.1 Approaches and important themes
Approaches to the ethics of the letterJames L. Boyce (2000)
628608 S. Fernández, “‘Ya no vivo Yo, es Cristo que Vive en Mí’ (Gál 2,20): ‘Ser Cristo’ Como Clave de la Vida del Padre Alberto Hurtado”, Teología y Vida 4:3 (2005), pp. 352–373.
https://doi.org/10.4067/S0049-34492005000200003
stresses the link between ethical guidelines in Chapters 5 and 6 and the theological argument in the previous parts of the letter. In Galatians, theology and ethics are thus inextricably linked. Larry W. Hurtado
629609 M.I. Barbeito Carneiro, “En Él Fueron Transformadas”, Via Spiritus: Revista de História da Espiritualidade e do Sentimento Religioso 14 (2007), pp. 31–64.
(2004) draws attention to the different ways in which New Testament writers depict Jesus’ death as paradigmatic and as criterion for the daily life of believers. In Galatians, Hurtado discusses 2:19–20, 5:24–25, as well as 6:13–14 and 17. Gys M.H. Loubser
630610 D.T. Ejenobo, “The Mystical Element in Paul’s Theology of the Holy Spirit: An African Interpretation”, The Asia Journal of Theology 23:1 (2009), pp. 69–81.
(2005) points out that scholars too easily pass over Galatians as an important source for Paul’s conception of Christian freedom, since they regard it as a contingent letter. Loubser thus highlights the important ways in which Paul uses apocalyptic notions in the letter to get the idea across that a totally new era has arrived in Christ, characterised by freedom and by the activity of the Spirit that produces the spiritual fruit that the law cannot bring about. In a study of the morality of Paul’s converts, Edwin D. Freed
631611 J.O. Adeyanju, “Christian Spirituality, Depicted in Galatians 5:16–18, as a Tool for Rebranding in Nigeria”, African Journal of Biblical Studies 28:1 (2010), pp. 84–101.
(2005) stresses the importance of faithfulness towards God and the experience of the Spirit in Paul’s efforts to convert Gentiles. Freed discusses the authentic Pauline letters one by one. The morality of Galatians is summarised as a morality of “faithfulness, the Spirit and the Jewish law” and the letter is discussed pericope by pericope from this perspective. In a contribution on vocation and leadership in the Pauline literature, A. Katherine Grieb
632612 C. Muessig, “Signs of Salvation: The Evolution of Stigmatic Spirituality before Francis of Assisi”, Church History 82:1 (2013), pp. 40–68.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S000964071200251X
(2005) draws attention to the disruptive nature of the grace in Christ whereby Paul, and others, were called by God to a new type of freedom and service. D. Francois Tolmie
633613 C. Muessig, The Stigmata in Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020).
(2006) provides a lengthy list of various types of positive and negative behaviour mentioned in Galatians before investigating the theological background of identity and ethics presupposed by the letter. The effect of God’s salvation is described as spiritual liberation and the ethics underlying the letter is summarised by means of three concepts: spiritual freedom, love and the Spirit. Noting that the situational impact on the literary function of Pauline paraenesis has not been studied thoroughly, Rudolf Hoppe
634614 M. Welch, “Man-ifestation of the Spirit: An Investigation on the Impact of a Curriculum and Small Group Spiritual Direction on the Spiritual Formation of Protestant Men”, Pastoral Psychology 62:1 (2013), pp. 81–99.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-012-0449-9
(2010) focuses on this issue in Galatians. Hoppe shows that in this instance the paraenesis primarily serves inner-Christian disputes instead of positioning the congregation in a non-Christian context. James W. Thompson
635615 B. Repschinski, “Lebensreflexion als Ort der Gotteserfahrung: Ignatius von Loyola und Paulus von Tarsus im Vergleich”, Zeitschrift für Katholische Theologie 135:2/3 (2013), pp. 230–251.
(2011) highlights the coherence in Paul’s moral teaching. It was based on the memory of Jesus’ death and resurrection that would guide their behaviour, against the background of the story of Israel. Furthermore, Paul viewed believers as holy people who had to separate themselves from the Gentiles, and their moral conduct had to be shaped by both the story of Jesus and the law. According to Thompson, the centrality of love is the most characteristic feature of Paul’s moral instruction. Jacobus Kok
636616 E. Cornelius, “The Relevance of Galatians 5:16–26 in the Modern ‘Spiritual Intelligence’ Debate”, Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif 55:3/4 (2014), pp. 589–610.
https://doi.org/10.5952/55-3-4-655
(2011) highlights the important relationship between mission and ethics in Galatians. One thus should not study the one without the other. Contact with the gospel changes one’s identity and leads to the development of new ethical values. In Galatians, Paul’s ethics indirectly implies mission, thus pointing to the close link between mission and ethics. Bert Jan Lietaert Peerbolte
637617 M.H. Crosby, Fruit of the Spirit: Pauline Mysticism for the Church Today (Maryknoll NY: Orbis, 2015).
(2012) points out that Paul stressed the mental boundaries of his congregations so that they could develop into moral boundaries. In particular, he fenced them off from the past and the present: from the past, since the Christ event changed history totally, and from the present in the sense that he emphasised the boundaries between them and the Gentiles. They were now the “holy ones” and their sanctification was of utmost importance. Chun Sunwoo
638618 L.T. Hardin, “Is a Pauline Spirituality Still Viable?”, Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care 8:2 (2015), pp. 132–146.
https://doi.org/10.1177/193979091500800202
(2012) is critical of the indicative-imperative approach to Paul’s ethics, in particular the idea that the “indicative” describes his theology and the “imperative” the moral action. From Galatians it is clear that Paul’s ethics covers both aspects. Oliver O’Donovan
639619 J. da Costa Junior, “Experiência Religiosa Mística a Partir de Martin Heidegger”, Revista de Estudos e Pesquisa da Religião 18:2 (2015), pp. 55‑71.
(2014) considers the flesh-Spirit contrast in the ethics in Galatians. It is a way of framing ethical issues and not a law or demand; it enables Paul to bring into moral life the notion of spiritual liberation brought about by the new creation in Christ, and it focuses ethics on mutual service, and love towards others. Volker Rabens
640620 P.A. McClendon, Paul’s Spirituality in Galatians: A Critique of Contemporary Christian Spiritualities (Eugene OR: Wipf & Stock, 2015).
(2014) is of the opinion that one does not necessarily have to give up the indicative-imperative approach to the ethics of Galatians, as long as one keeps in mind that this is but one aspect underlying Paul’s ethics in the letter. Rabens also suggests that it may be better to speak of the “implicit indicative-imperative” in the letter, since Paul does not always use these grammatical categories when expressing the divine and human sides of actions. In a discussion of the depiction of Christian life in Galatians, James D.G. Dunn
641621 M. Rosebrock, “Luther’s Visual Theology: The Lectures on Galatians and Cranach’s Law and Gospel Paintings”, Concordia Journal 42:4 (2016), pp. 332–339.
(2016) emphasises the importance of faith and Spirit. In Paul’s theology, the faith-Spirit nexus was fundamental. This is what he experienced when he came to faith and which characterised Christian life from his perspective. Llane B. Briese
642622 S.J. Dubbelman, “The Darkness of Faith: A Study in Martin Luther’s 1535 Galatians Commentary”, Trinity Journal 37:2 (2016), pp. 213–232.
(2016) draws attention to the imagery of slavery used in 5:13–18 and 2 Corinthians 4:1–6 to describe ethical issues, highlighting the way in which Paul uses this metaphor to link the behaviour of believers to the Father, Son and Spirit. John Anthony Dunne
643623 A.D. Saner, “Of Bottles and Wells: Hagar’s Christian Legacy”, Journal of Theological Interpretation 11:2 (2017), pp. 199–215.
https://doi.org/10.5325/jtheointe.11.2.0199
(2017) is of the opinion that Paul claims in Galatians that participating in Christ’s death and suffering, and not circumcision, are for him the true indications of being part of the people of God. In a thorough investigation of the ethics of Galatians, Gysbert M.H. Loubser
644624 N.C. James (transl. & ed.), Jeanne Guyon’s Christian Worldview: Her Biblical Commentaries on Galatians, Ephesians, and Colossians with Explanations and Reflections on the Interior Life (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2017).
(2017) highlights Paul’s emphasis on the radicalness of the new life brought about by the coming of Christ and his Spirit. The Spirit introduces the followers of Christ to the new life in him and leads them to a life of faithfulness, bringing about the fruit of Spirit. This is a life of freedom (from the elements of the world and from the law), which implies that the ethics of the new creation is christological and pneumatological and also anomistic. Scot McKnight
645625 S.J. Chester, “‘Abba! Father!’ (Galatians 4:6): Justification and Assurance in Martin Luther’s Lectures on Galatians (1535)”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 15–28. For a response to Chester’s contribution, see P.J. Leithart, “Response: Galatians Five Hundred Years Later”, Biblical Research 63 (2018), pp. 63–71.
(2019) discusses discipleship in Romans and Galatians and points out that according to these two letters, the essence of discipleship is love. The believers are called to commitment to one another, supporting one another and living with one another in a Christlike manner. Grant Buchanan
646626 N.K. Swazo, “Heidegger’s Destruktion of Theology: ‘Primordial Faith’ and ‘Recognition’ of the Messiah”, Modern Theology 35:1 (2019), pp. 138–162.
https://doi.org/10.1111/moth.12447
(2020) highlights the link between identity and human agency in Galatians 5 and 6. Through Christ’s coming, a new community has been established and this community is no longer controlled by the sin and flesh. Instead, believers should now actively choose themselves to lead a new life. Paul thus stresses agency in these two chapters. Céline Rohmer
647627 W. Hua, “Pauline Pneumatology and the Chinese Rites: Spirit and Culture in the Holy See’s Missionary Strategy”, in: G.L. Green, S.T. Pardue and K.K. Yeo (eds.), Majority World Theology: Christian Doctrine in Global Context (Downers Grove IL: Intervarsity Press, 2020), pp. 280‑294.
(2020) draws attention to the aesthetic dimension of Galatians, arguing that in the three instances in the letter where Paul refers to “the good”, a Pauline aesthetics also becomes visible. Paul not only views the truth of the gospel as an event of liberation but also points out the beauty of the divine transformation at work. In 4:12–20, he describes beauty as a creative gesture of God, while in 5:1–13, he focuses on the usefulness of beauty for a free existence, and in 6:1–10, he stresses that the good depends on beauty.The role of the SpiritGys M.H. Loubser published two contributions in which the role of the Spirit is stressed. In the first one, published in 2006
648628 J.L. Boyce, “The Poetry of the Spirit: Willing and Doing in Galatians 5 and 6”, Word & World 20:3 (2000), pp. 290–298.
, Loubser points out that, according to Galatians, believers receive the Spirit by faith in Christ. The Spirit guides them to do the will of God according to the faithfulness of Christ. Such an ethics is thus Christological-pneumatological and anomistic but not libertinistic. In the second one, published in 2009
649629 L.W. Hurtado, “Jesus’ Death as Paradigmatic in the New Testament”, Scottish Journal of Theology 57:4 (2004), pp. 413–433.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S003693060400033X
, Loubser stresses that, according to Galatians, ethical behaviour is not determined by the law but generated by Christ’s faithfulness that is introduced in the lives of believers through the indwelling of the Spirit. Their behaviour is thus characterised by love and service to others. Accordingly, Paul’s ethics has a pneumatological-soteriological basis. Susann Liubinskas
650630 G.M.H. Loubser, “Paul’s Ethic of Freedom: No Flash in the Galatian Pan”, Neotestamentica 39:2 (2005), pp. 313–337.
(2012) uses social identity theory to show that Paul depicts the Spirit in 3:19–4:7 as the most important identity marker of believers and thus, according to 5:13–6:10, life in the Spirit (according to “the law of Christ”) is central to Christian ethos. Galatians 5:13–6:10 should thus not be regarded as an addendum. It is central to Paul’s argument and meant to reinforce identity. According to Michael J. Gorman
651631 E.D. Freed, The Morality of Paul’s Converts (Bibleworld, London/Oakville CT: Equinox, 2005), pp. 212–248.
(2016), Paul was both an apocalyptic and a new-covenant theologian and reworked his theology of the covenant in the light of his experience of Christ as the Messiah and the Spirit, and in particular, in light of the fact that indwelling of the Spirit and the law took on a cruciform mode. The revelation to and in Paul can thus not be separated.FreedomThomas Söding
652632 A.K. Grieb, “‘The One Who Called You...’: Vocation and Leadership in the Pauline Literature”, Interpretation 59:2 (2005), pp. 154–165.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002096430505900205
(2003) regards freedom as a soteriological keyword in Galatians. Söding presents an overview of the way in which the concept developed in Paul’s thinking and goes on to outline the structure of the theology of freedom in the letter in terms of three categories: the freedom of the Spirit, of the congregation and of love. The implications for modern issues are also indicated. In another contribution, Söding
653633 D.F. Tolmie, “Liberty – Love – Spirit: Ethics and Ethos According to the Letter to the Galatians”, in: J.G. van der Watt (ed.), Identity, Ethics, and Ethos in the New Testament (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 141, Berlin/New York NY: De Gruyter, 2006), pp. 241–256.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110893939.241
(2008) takes 5:1 as point of departure to contrast Paul’s view of freedom and current views of freedom. In Christ, people are liberated from sin and death. They are also liberated to love. Söding furthermore compares Paul’s view on free will and the way in which Stoics interpreted free will. Matthias Konradt
654634 R. Hoppe, “Paränese und Theologie im Galaterbrief – eine Profilskizze”, in: M. Bachmann and B. Kollmann (eds.), Umstrittener Galaterbrief: Studien zur Situierung und Theologie des Paulus-Schreibens (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 106, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2010), pp. 207–230.
(2005) summarises the ethical section in the letter (5:13–6:10) as “Die Christonomie der Freiheit” (“the Christonomy of freedom”) and discusses the characteristics of freedom in Christ as referred to in the letter, the relationship between freedom and mutual service through the power of the Spirit, and the pragmatic function of 5:13–6:10. Wayne Coppins
655635 J.W. Thompson, Moral Formation According to Paul: The Context and Coherence of Pauline Ethics (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2011).
(2009) offers an interpretation of freedom as conceptualised in Paul’s letters. In the case of Galatians, rather than describing the content of freedom as freedom from the law, Coppins argues that a more comprehensive type of freedom is in view in texts such as Galatians 2:4, 5:1, 13, namely a freedom from the elements of the world. According to Ladislav Tichý
656636 J. Kok, “Mission and Ethics in Galatians”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 67:1 (2011), pp. 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v67i1.896
(2010), when Paul refers to “freedom” in Galatians, he primarily has freedom from “the works of the law” in mind. Furthermore, he also stresses the positive side of freedom in Christ. Freedom should be manifested by loving service to other people. Ariane Chabert
657637 B.J. Lietaert Peerbolte, “Morality and Boundaries in Paul”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 68:1 (2012), pp. 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v68i1.1240
(2012) interprets the apparent opposition between 6:2a and 6:5 as an indication of the different types of freedom that faith in Christ brings: from the world, the flesh, judgement and the I – an indication that freedom is the condition and the border of “the law of Christ”. František Ábel
658638 C. Sunwoo, “A New Understanding of Pauline Ethics Beyond ‘Indicative and Imperative’: With Reference to Galatians”, Canon & Culture 6:1 (2012), pp. 193–218.
https://doi.org/10.31280/CC.2012.04.6.1.193
(2019) points out that scholars’ view of freedom in Galatians has been influenced greatly by Luther’s interpretation of it as freedom from the law, and instead approaches the concept from the perspective of the sociocultural dynamics in the first century CE. Because of their acceptance of the gospel, the Galatians acquired a new identity, freedom in Christ. Nina E. Livesey
659639 O. O’Donovan, “Ethics: Flesh and Spirit”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 271–284.
(2019) agrees with the classicist Matthew Roller that ἐλευθερία (“freedom”) was never an existential category in ancient discourse but was used for characterising a different situation. Livesey applies this insight to 5:1, arguing that Paul used the term as a metaphor for a different position that he wished the Galatians to adopt, namely “Paul’s position, or the no-Torah, no-circumcision position”.
660640 V. Rabens, “‘Indicative and Imperative’ as the Substructure of Paul’s Theology-and-Ethics in Galatians? A Discussion of Divine and Human Agency in Paul ”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 285–305.
Mihai Afrenţoae
661641 J.D.G. Dunn, “The Christian Life from the Perspective of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, in: S. McKnight and J.B. Modica (eds.), The Apostle Paul and the Christian Life: Ethical and Missional Implications of the New Perspective (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2016), pp. 1–18.
(2020) offers an anthropological-ethical analysis of the concept “freedom” (and related concepts) in Galatians. The letter has a multi-dimensional perspective of freedom: freedom from sin, from this evil age, and from the Jewish law. The gift of freedom also implies ethical responsibility on the part of believers.Friedrich Wilhelm Horn
662642 L.B. Briese, Walking the Path of Service: An Exegetical-Theological Study of Gal 5,13–18 and 2 Cor 4,1–6 (Tesi Gregoriana: Serie Teologia 223, Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2016).
(2020) discusses the use of the concept of freedom in 5:13 and 1 Peter 2:16, arguing that they are not related in any way. Galatians 5:13 focuses on freedom from slavery towards Christ, further characterised as freedom from oneself and as freedom to be expressed as love towards the neighbour, whereas the use of the concept in 1 Peter 2:16 presupposes the defamation of believers in society – a situation in which they are called upon to use their political freedom in such a way that no offense is caused to anyone. LovePieter G.R. de Villiers
663643 J.A. Dunne, Persecution and Participation in Galatians (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.454, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155418-6
(2014) points out that scholars tend to ignore the importance of love in Galatians because of the polemical nature of the letter. De Villiers shows how important love is in the letter by discussing divine love (as the source of God’s salvific, transformative deeds and as divine characteristic) and love as distinguishing mark of the believing congregation. De Villiers also works out the implications of love for the ethos and ethics of believers.ObedienceIn a discussion of the concept “truth of the gospel” in 2:5 and 14, Moisés Silva
664644 G.M.H. Loubser, Paul Cries Freedom in Galatia! On Ethics in the New Creation (Theology in Africa 6, Vienna/Zürich: LIT Verlag, 2017).
(2000) highlights the importance of obedience. It is vital to understand the teaching about Gentile liberty, but this also implies the responsibility to act accordingly.SanctificationJ. Ayodeji Adewuya
665645 S. McKnight, “The Challenge of Allegiance in the Roman Empire: Discipleship in Romans and Galatians”, in: J.K. Goodrich and M.L. Strauss (eds.), Following Jesus Christ: The New Testament Message of Discipleship for Today: A Volume in Honor of Michael J. Wilkins (Grand Rapids MI: Kregel Academic, 2019), pp. 92–108.
(2010) focuses on the link between crucifixion and sanctification in Galatians. On the basis of 2:19–20, 5:24 and 6:14, Adewuya argues that Paul uses the notion of crucifixion to describe what happens to believers when they convert. God’s new people are identified by the indwelling of the Spirit and the Spirit brings about sanctification in their lives – an event that is both immediate (as in 2:20) and on-going (as in 5:24). Mariam J. Kamell
666646 G. Buchanan, “Identity and Human Agency in Galatians 5–6”, Australian Biblical Review 68 (2020), pp. 54–66.
(2014) highlights parallels between 5:13–6:10 and the Letter of James and notes the following: Both Paul and James emphasise the importance of grace. In Paul’s case, the empowering agent is the Spirit. For James it is wisdom, but in both cases the empowering agent is given, not earned. In the light of the investigation, Kamell also stresses the importance of sanctification for one’s understanding of soteriology. In an investigation of sanctification in the letters of Paul, Hanna Stettler
667647 C. Rohmer, “Du deutéro-Élian à l’Élian historique: Relecture d’une course belle”, Études Théologiques et Religieuses 95:3 (2020), pp. 531–541.
https://doi.org/10.3917/etr.953.0531
(2014) finds the following: The subject of sanctification is God and the Spirit; its object is believers as the eschatological people of God; the content of sanctification is “the law of Christ”, summarised in the love commandment; the means of sanctification is faith and love; and Paul motivates sanctification by depicting it as the necessary outcome of God’s actions in believers.MimesisAntonio Pitta
668648 G.M.H. Loubser, “The Ethic of the Free: A Walk According to the Spirit! A Perspective from Galatians”, Verbum et Ecclesia 27:2 (2006), pp. 614–640.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ve.v27i2.167
(2015) draws attention to mimesis in Galatians. Although it does not occur explicitly in the letter, it is found implicitly in 1:13–2:21, 3:5–6 and 4:28–31. This shows that mimesis is very important to Paul in situations where religious identity is in danger.Justification and ethicsIn a study on the moral-practical relevance of the doctrine of justification, Marcus Hüttner
669649 G.M.H. Loubser, “Life in the Spirit as Wise Remedy for the Folly of the Flesh: Ethical Notes from Galatians”, Neotestamentica 43:2 (2009), pp. 354–371.
(2004) takes the importance of the concept “freedom” (in 5:1) as cue. The fact that a gracious God gives justification to people as a gift implies that faith enables them to live a humane way of life, motivated by the power of God’s liberating and encouraging love. According to Robert L. Brawley
670650 S. Liubinskas, “Identification by Spirit Alone: Community-Identity Construction in Galatians 3:19–4:7”, The Asbury Journal 67:1 (2012), pp. 27–55.
(2007), Galatians reflects a metaethical relationship with God that Paul describes as justification. Paul regards justification as the source of social identity and of a new way of behaving. Paul experienced this himself when his own relationship with God changed and his behaviour had to change. Thomas Söding
671651 M.J. Gorman, “The Apocalyptic New Covenant and the Shape of Life in the Spirit According to Galatians”, in: B.C. Blackwell, J.K. Goodrich and J. Maston (eds.), Paul and the Apocalyptic Imagination (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2016), pp. 317–338.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt19qgfj6.20
(2010) discusses the relationship between justification and ethics in Galatians. After a historical overview of theological discussions on justification and an exegetical investigation of key texts in the letter, Söding characterises the ethics of the letter as an ethics of love indicative of the concrete relevance of justification in the lives of believers. This love-ethics stems from God, is revealed in Christ, powered by the Spirit and is essentially an ethics of freedom. Simon Butticaz
672652 T. Söding, “Die Freiheit des Glaubens: Konkretionen der Soteriologie nach dem Galaterbrief”, in: W. Kraus and K.-W. Niebuhr (eds.), Frühjudentum und Neues Testament im Horizont Biblischer Theologie: Mit einem Anhang zum Corpus Judaeo-Hellenisticum Novi Testamenti (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.162, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003), pp. 113–134.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157377-4
(2017) takes 5:6 as point of departure for discussing the relationship between justification by faith and rewarding/punishment at the last judgement in the letter and argues that the theological and ethical arguments in the letter form an organic whole in that individuals justified without the law will appear before the Lord as judge and are thus called upon to practise a corresponsive ethos that is inclusive and reciprocal.Violence, conflict and peaceIn a study on conflict and peace in Galatians, Michael Lattke
673653 T. Söding, “Zur Freiheit befreit (Gal 5,1): Paulus und die Kritik der Autonomie”, Internationale Katholische Zeitschrift/Communio 37:2 (2008), pp. 92–112.
(2004) identifies several layers of conflict that are reflected in the letter and notes that it shows that the freedom Paul proclaimed cannot be upheld without conflict. However, one should strive to overcome violent conflict by peaceful conflict. James A. Kelhoffer
674654 M. Konradt, “‘Die aus Glauben, diese sind Kinder Abrahams’ (Gal 3,7): Erwägungen zum galatischen Konflikt im Lichte frühjüdischer Abrahamtraditionen”, in: G. Gelardini (ed.), Kontexte der Schrift: Band I:
(2007) responds critically to the remarks of William V. Harris
675
zum 60. Geburtstag (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2005), pp. 25‑48. Text, Ethik, Judentum und Christentum, Gesellschaft: Ekkehard W. Stegemann
about anger management in the Pauline letters. Amongst others, Kelhoffer refers to 5:20. Furthermore, Kelhoffer argues that the anger that Paul expressed toward Peter in Antioch was not consistent with Paul’s own expectations of others but that he probably would have regarded his anger as justified. One of the examples that Jeremy F. Hultin
676655 W. Coppins, The Interpretation of Freedom in the Letters of Paul: With Special Reference to the “German” Tradition (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.261, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151604-7
(2008) considers in a book on the ethics of obscene speech in Early Christianity and its environment comes from 5:12. According to Hultin, Paul’s statement was sharp but should not be categorised as an example of obscene speech. Jeremy Punt
677656 L. Tichý, “‘Svoboda’ v Listu Galaťanům”, Studia Theologica 4 (2010), pp. 1–16.
(2009) believes that Paul regarded the crucifixion of Jesus as the result of violence and victimisation but that he also used the symbol of the cross to unmask powers of terror and to subvert dominant perceptions/structures in his time. Furthermore, Punt is critical of the fact that triumphalism seems to dominate churches in our time, pointing out that such an attitude will not help to promote human rights. In a contribution on violence in Galatians, D. Francois Tolmie
678657 A. Chabert, “βάρη et φορτίον: Vocation et limite de la liberté en Christ: Une proposition de lecture de Gal 6,2 et 6,5”, Rivista Biblica 60:3 (2012), pp. 357–370.
(2012) offers an overview of all the references to violence in the letter and outlines the violent rhetoric used in the letter. Tolmie also points out that Paul apparently was not aware that his rhetoric and his gospel had a violent side. In a study of the politics of peace in Paul’s letters, Jeremy Gabrielson
679658 F. Ábel, “Freedom in Christ in Galatians: A Matter of Identity”, Communio Viatorum 61:3 (2019), pp. 235–255.
(2013) argues that Galatians shows how Paul’s trajectory of violence came to a sudden end when Christ was revealed to him at the Damascus event and that his life was thereafter put on a non-violent trajectory. Marcus A. Mininger
680659 N.E. Livesey, “Is Freedom an Existential Category in Ancient Discourse?”, Biblical Interpretation 27:2 (2019), pp. 274–297.
https://doi.org/10.1163/15685152-00272p06
(2016) appropriates the message of 2:2, 2:11–14 and Philippians 1:12–18 for the current context as follows: One of the best ways to test one’s God-centredness in the ministry is the way one handles conflict with other people, in particular with peers.LawAccording to Heikki Leppä
681660 Op. cit., p. 296.
(2012), Paul forbade the Galatians (who were Gentile Christians) from following the law and instead provided them with a list of vices and virtues. Since the law was not part of the list of virtues, it does not play a part in Paul’s ethics in this letter. Serge Holvoet
682661 M. Afrențoae, “Lo Spartito della Libertà nella Lettera ai Galati”, Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai: Theologia Catholica Latina 65:1 (2020), pp. 21–50.
https://doi.org/10.24193/theol.cath.latina.2020.lxv.1.02
(2015) summarises Paul’s view of freedom as an articulation between the law and moral philosophy. For Paul, it is important that Christ is the end of the law and that the law is best practised by means of perfect love. Sean Winter
683662 F.W. Horn, “Vom Missbrauch, von der Missdeutung und vom Bewahren der Freiheit: Galater 5,13 und 1. Petrus 2,16”, in: M. Bauspieß, J.U. Beck and F. Portenhauser (eds.), Bestimmte Freiheit: Festschrift für Christof Landmesser zum 60. Geburtstag (Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte 64, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2020), pp. 81–94.
(2019) is of the opinion that the positive statements that Paul makes about the law in 5:13–14 and 6:2 amidst his otherwise sharp criticism of the law in the letter can be explained by means of Lou Martin’s notion of the two voices of the law, something that Paul experienced himself and expressed in 2:19–21. PovertyOn the basis of 6:10, Kjetil Fretheim
684663 P.G.R. de Villiers, “Transformation in Love in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 19 (2014), pp. 143–163.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2S.8
(2008) argues that one should view Christian ethics as a communitarian type of ethics and that it should be guided by a preference for poor people. In Bruce W. Longenecker’s
685664 M. Silva, “The Truth of the Gospel: Paul’s Mission According to Galatians: In Honor of Peter T. O’Brien”, in: P. Bolt and M. Thompson (eds.), The Gospel to the Nations: Perspectives on Paul’s Mission (Downers Grove IL: Apollos, 2000), pp. 51–61.
(2009) argument that care for the poor was an integral part of the gospel for Paul, 2:10 plays an important role. According to Longenecker, this verse does not only refer to poor believers in Jerusalem but to the poor everywhere. Furthermore, for Paul caring about the poor had everything to do with the truth of the gospel and thus it was a fundamental aspect of his message, also in Galatians. Jinsu Im
686665 J.A. Adewuya, “Paul, Crucifixion, and Sanctification in Galatians”, in: S.J. Land, R.D. Moore and J.C. Thomas (eds.), Passover, Pentecost and Parousia: Studies in Celebration of the Life and Ministry of R. Hollis Gause (Journal of Pentecostal Theology Supplement Series 36, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2010), pp. 90–105.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004397125_008
See also the later version: J.A. Adewuya, Holiness in the Letters of Paul: The Necessary Response to the Gospel (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2016), pp. 86–98.
(2014) notes that Jesus and the Early Church transformed the vertical form of euergetism that was characteristic of the time, to horizontal solidarity. One of the examples that Im discusses in this regard is 2:10. Im believes that the support of poor believers in Jerusalem illustrates such a horizontal solidarity. Kar Yong Lim
687666 M.J. Kamell, “Life in the Spirit and Life in Wisdom: Reading Galatians and James as a Dialogue ”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 353–362.
(2017) identifies the following economic principles in Pauline letters with the Jerusalem collection as a test case: grace and generosity, equality and sharing resources as a spiritual family.
16.2 Background
According to Bertram L. Melbourne
688667 H. Stettler, Heiligung bei Paulus: Ein Beitrag aus biblisch-theologischer Sicht (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.368, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 283–299.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152758-6
(2002), the vices and virtues in 5:19–23 do not represent a random selection from Hellenistic sources but are arranged in an orderly manner in the following way: vices linked to the individual, the divine and other people, and virtues linked to the divine, other people and the individual. James W. Thompson
689668 A. Pitta, “I Gradi della Mimesi nella Lettera ai Galati”, Liber Annuus 65 (2015), pp. 249–257.
https://doi.org/10.1484/J.LA.4.000113
(2011) analyses the way in which Paul formed his congregations morally. One of the sections that Thompson investigates is the virtue and vice list in 5:19–23. According to Thompson, Paul’s approach to moral formation was analogous to what happened in moral instruction in Hellenistic Judaism. Jonathan A. Draper
690669 M. Hüttner, Zur Freiheit befreit (Gal 5,1): Die moralisch-praktische Relevanz der Rechtfertigungslehre (Bamberger Theologische Studien 25, Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2004).
(2011) focuses on the way in which the topos of the two ways functioned in Galatians and in Didache 1–6 and 16 and finds that one can identify differences with regard to the way in which it was used in the two communities in terms of Christology, eschatology and views of ethics and the law. David S. Harvey
691670 R.L. Brawley, “Identity and Metaethics: Being Justified and Ethics in Galatians”, in: R.L. Brawley (ed.), Character Ethics and the New Testament: Moral Dimensions of Scripture (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2007), pp. 107–122.
(2012) is of the opinion that Paul aligns his own biography with the “upside-down honour” demonstrated in Christ’s death in Galatians. This code of honour is also enacted in the community by the Spirit. Troels Engberg-Pedersen
692671 T. Söding, “Glaube, der durch Liebe wirkt: Rechtfertigung und Ethik im Galaterbrief”, in: M. Bachmann and B. Kollmann (eds.), Umstrittener Galaterbrief: Studien zur Situierung und Theologie des Paulus-Schreibens (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 106, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2010), pp. 165–206.
(2013) discusses the movement from sin to virtue in 5:13–26 from two perspectives: the characteristics of sin and how Paul views the movement from sin to virtue (“the fruit of the Spirit”). In the discussion, Engberg-Pedersen points out similarities between Paul’s views and Stoic and Aristotelian views.
František Ábel
693672 S. Butticaz, “‘La foi agissant par l’amour’ (Galates 5,6): Justification par la foi et parénèse du jugement dans la Lettre aux Galates”, Biblica 98:1 (2017), pp. 91–111.
https://doi.org/10.2143/BIB.98.1.3197387
(2016) investigates the Psalms of Solomon as background for understanding what is called “Paul’s messianic ethics”. Ábel outlines a common messianic ethics based on the notions of mercy and merit in Pauline theology (amongst others, in 5:13-6:10) and the Psalms of Solomon, with Paul’s views on justice and mercy being integrated by the concept of obedience (linked to faith in the crucified and resurrected Messiah). Christopher M. Tuckett
694673 M. Lattke, “Conflict and Peace in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute 30/31 (2004), pp. 155–180.
(2015) draws attention to Paul’s diverse use of traditions – a situation that might incline one to think that some of his statements lack coherence. However, Tuckett suggests that there is some coherence to be found in this diversity if one realises that there is an underlying principle guiding Paul’s choices, namely the notion of (spiritual) freedom towards other people (5:1). From Paul’s use of the term εὐπροσωπέω (“make a good showing”) in 6:12–13, David S. Harvey
695674 J.A. Kelhoffer, “Suppressing Anger in Early Christianity: Examples from the Pauline Tradition”, Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 47:3 (2007), pp. 307–325. Also available in: J.A. Kelhoffer, Conceptions of “Gospel” and Legitimacy in Early Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.324, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 317–334.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152993-1
(2018) deduces that there was also a concern about honour in the Galatian crisis. Accordingly, Paul tried to encourage a type of ethics specifically rejecting attempts to publicly gain honour.
16.3 Studies on specific verses/pericopes
1:8–9Anthony C. Thiselton
696675 W.V. Harris, Restraining Rage: The Ideology of Anger Control in Classical Antiquity (Cambridge MA/London: Harvard University Press, 2001).
(2018) poses the question as to whether it was appropriate for Paul to curse people who taught false doctrine, as he does in these two verses and in 1 Corinthians 16:22. According to Thiselton, Paul’s practice makes sense if one takes into account the covenant context (blessing/curse) within which Paul uttered the curses.2:10In Bruce W. Longenecker’s
697676 J.F. Hultin, The Ethics of Obscene Speech in Early Christianity and Its Environment (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 128, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2008), pp. 148–150.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004168039.i-279
(2009) argument that care for the poor was an integral part of the gospel for Paul, this verse plays an important role. According to Longenecker, Paul does not only refer to poor believers in Jerusalem but to the poor everywhere. Furthermore, for Paul caring about the poor had everything to do with the truth of the gospel and thus it was a fundamental aspect of his message, also in Galatians. According to Jinsu Im
698677 J. Punt, “Cross-Purposes in Paul? Violence of the Cross, Galatians, and Human Dignity”, Scriptura 102 (2009), pp. 446–462.
https://doi.org/10.7833/102-0-606
(2014), Jesus and the Early Church transformed the vertical form of euergetism that was characteristic of the time, to horizontal solidarity. One of the examples that Im discusses in this regard is this verse. Im believes that the support of poor believers in Jerusalem illustrates such a horizontal solidarity.3:28Studies of a more general natureEd L. Miller
699678 D.F. Tolmie, “Violence in the Letter to the Galatians?”, in: P.G.R. de Villiers and J.W. van Henten (eds.), Coping with Violence in the New Testament (Studies in Theology and Religion 16, Leiden MA/Boston: Brill, 2012), pp. 69–82.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004221055_005
(2002) is of the opinion that this verse is not the great egalitarian text it is often assumed to be. It refers to the soteriological unity that all believers have in Christ, but this does not annul the social differences between them. Andrew D. Clarke
700679 J. Gabrielson, Paul’s Non-Violent Gospel: The Theological Politics of Peace in Paul’s Life and Letters (Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2013), pp. 79–138.
(2002) investigates Romans 16 in the light of Galatians 3:28 and concludes that the greetings in Romans demonstrates Paul’s theology of inclusiveness – in ethnic, social and gender terms. John H. Elliott
701680 M.A. Mininger, “A God-Centered Ministry and Responses to Conflict between Peers: Perspectives from the Apostle Paul”, Mid-America Journal of Theology 27 (2016), pp. 123–136.
(2003) disagrees with scholars who believe that Jesus created a community of equals that were structured as egalitarian house churches after his death. Elliott also disagrees with scholars who interpret v. 28 as indicating an equalisation of statuses and roles. It only shows that social distinctions were not determinative any more for being in Christ. Douglas A. Campbell
702681 H. Leppä, “The Torah in Galatians”, in: M. Meiser (ed.), The Torah in the Ethics of Paul (Library of New Testament Studies 473, London: T & T Clark, 2012), pp. 59–69. See also the more general contribution by Meiser in this volume: M. Meiser, “The Torah in the Ethics of Paul”, in: M. Meiser (ed.), The Torah in the Ethics of Paul (Library of New Testament Studies 473, London: T & T Clark, 2012), pp. 120–143.
(2003) views v. 28 as an admirable summary of Paul’s gospel. It clearly stipulates the negations caused by the reconciliation in Christ, thus illustrating the eschatological logic of Paul’s gospel. In another contribution, Campbell
703682 S. Holvoet, “Esquisse d’une définition de la liberté selon Paul”, Mélanges de Science Religieuse 72:2 (2015), pp. 17–28.
(2005) argues that v. 28 may be viewed as a compact articulation of the PPME model (the Pneumatologically Participatory Martyrological Eschatology model) which characterises Paul’s gospel. This model also highlights important ethical actions emanating from Paul’s gospel. Kathy Ehrensperger
704683 S. Winter, “Paul’s Ethics and Paul’s Experience: Law and Love in Galatians”, in: M. Zehnder and P. Wick (eds.), Biblical Ethics: Tensions between Justice and Mercy, Law and Love (Gorgias Biblical Studies 70, Piscataway NJ: Gorgias Press, 2019), pp. 251–270.
https://doi.org/10.31826/9781463239466-012
(2004) discusses the dynamic underlying Paul’s theologising and cites v. 28 and Romans 9:24 as examples. According to Ehrensperger, this dynamic is best described as “a vivid process of dialogic interaction between the Scriptures, the Christ-event and the actual life of the communities.”
705684 K. Fretheim, “Grums i Galaterbrevet: Om Kristen Etikk, Paulus og den Prioriterte Andre”, Tidsskrift for Teologi og Kirke 79:2 (2008), pp. 113–129.
https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1504-2952-2008-02-03
Michel Serres
706685 B.W. Longenecker, “The Poor of Galatians 2:10: The Interpretative Paradigm of the First Centuries”, in: B.W. Longenecker and K.D. Liebengood (eds.), Engaging Economics: New Testament Scenarios and Early Christian Reception (New Testament Scenarios and Early Christian Reception, Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2009), pp. 205–221. See also earlier: B.W. Longenecker, “Good News to the Poor: Jesus, Paul, and Jerusalem”, in: T.D. Still (ed.), Jesus and Paul Reconnected: Fresh Pathways into an Old Debate (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2007), pp. 37–65.
(2006) understands v. 28 as meaning that there is not any belonging in the sense of class, sex, language or nation anymore. There is only one identity: “I”, i.e., the “I” in Christ. Derek Woodard-Lehman
707686 J. Im, “Euergetism in Greco-Roman Antiquity and in Early Christianity”, Canon & Culture 8:2 (2014), pp. 269–303.
https://doi.org/10.31280/CC.2014.10.8.2.269
(2007) explores a dispersive universality not requiring others to be like oneself but by one identifying with them. This is linked to 3:26–28 and 2:19–20 as follows: “[B]aptism identifies the baptisand with Christ, inaugurates the new life of Christ living within, and initiates ongoing identification with others. The politics of baptismal identification is performative peacemaking; a pneumasomatics of identity that is simultaneously a body politics and a politics of bodies.”
708687 K.Y. Lim, “Paul the Economist? Economic Principles in Pauline Literature with the Jerusalem Collection as a Test Case”, Evangelical Review of Theology 41:1 (2017), pp. 19–31. Denis Fricker
709688 B.L. Melbourne, “Order or Disorder: The Structure of the Vices and Virtues in Galatians 5:19–23 Reconsidered”, St. Nersess Theological
(2009) points out that many exegetes interpret v. 28 as if it referred exclusively to some kind of utopia. By means of an analysis of the verse and a comparison thereof to Mark 10:6–8, Fricker shows that such an approach is not correct. David E. Aune
710
7 (2002), pp. 85–99. Review
(2010) investigates Early Christianity in the light of v. 28. Aune explains how Jesus dramatised a new notion of equality before God and how Paul’s view of human equality (which he limited to the church of God) also signalled a change in one’s attitude towards other people. Bruce Hansen
711689 J.W. Thompson, Moral Formation According to Paul: The Context and Coherence of Pauline Ethics (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2011).
(2010) focuses on Paul’s social vision as found in v. 28, 1 Corinthians 12:13 and Colossians 3:11. Hansen proposes that Paul’s vision is best explained by means of theories on ethnicity. Paul viewed believers as a new ethnic group that had been created through participation in Christ, with all other norms being relativised. Aquiles Ernesto Martínez
712690 J.A. Draper, “The Two Ways and Eschatological Hope: A Contested Terrain in Galatians 5 and the Didache”, Neotestamentica 45:2 (2011), pp. 221–251.
(2011) explores the prophetic scope of vv. 26–29. One should look critically at sociological strata in one’s world and why certain people are excluded, sometimes even moving beyond Paul’s own example, who did not always act consistently. A. Sue Russell
713691 D.S. Harvey, “‘Upside-Down Honour’ and the Spirit of the Faithful Son in Galatians”, Journal of the European Pentecostal Theological Association 32:1 (2012), pp. 61–74.
https://doi.org/10.1179/jep.2012.32.1.006
(2014) explains the contradictions between Paul’s statement in v. 28 and other instances in the Pauline tradition, where hierarchical structures are reinforced, by means of three concepts formulated by Victor Turner: liminality, structure and anti-structure. Pauline communities did not abolish societal structures but redefined the way in which people were to relate to each other within these structures. D. Francois Tolmie
714692 T. Engberg-Pedersen, “Von der ‘Sünde’ zur ‘Tugend’: Worum geht es eigentlich bei Paulus?”, Zeitschrift für Neues Testament 16:32 (2013), pp. 37–47.
(2014) points out that v. 28 has often been interpreted in such a way as to exclude or turn away certain people and thus advises that one should deliberately opt for interpreting this verse so that people are included and liberated. Wolfgang Stegemann
715693 F. Ábel, The Psalms of Solomon and the Messianic Ethics of Paul (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.416, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-153992-3
(2014) distinguishes between the following four ways of interpreting v. 28: The text promotes a radical egalitarianism annulling all differences; it refers only to soteriological issues and has no practical implications for daily life; it refers primarily to the ritual of baptism and not to everyday life (although practical implications are not excluded); and it does not refer to the eradication of differences between people but to the relativisation of such differences in the light of the new identity in Christ. Stegemann opts for the fourth option and explains the implications of such a choice. One of the examples that Stephen Richard Turley
716694 C.M. Tuckett, “‘For Freedom Christ Has Set Us Free’ (Gal 5,1): Freedom and Constraints in Paul’s Hermeneutics and Ethics”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 91:4 (2015), pp. 547–567.
https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.91.4.3129668
(2015) uses in a study of ritualised washings and meals in Galatians and 1 Corinthians, is vv. 26–29. One of the issues that Turley emphasises in this case is that Paul appeals to the fact that their baptised bodies witness to the Messianic age. This means that their bodies are oriented towards Christ and towards one another – an insight that should transform their relationships to one another. Jan Lambrecht
717695 D.S. Harvey, “Saving Face (εὐπροσωπέω) in Galatia: Concern for Honour in the Argument of Paul’s Letter”, in: J.M. Keady, T.E. Klutz and C.A. Strine (eds.), Scripture as Social Discourse: Social-Scientific Perspectives on Early Jewish and Christian Writings (T & T Clark Biblical Studies, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2018), pp. 183–196.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567676061.ch-012
(2017) argues that “one” in v. 28d means neither “one person” nor “the One New Man”. In this context, it means the same as “equal”. In Christ, everybody has an equal status. Elaine Padilla
718696 A.C. Thiselton, Puzzling Passages in Paul: Forty Conundrums Calmly Considered (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2018), pp. 107–110.
(2017) develops a politics of love on the basis of vv. 26–28. Such a revolutionary form of love can enable people to extend themselves to the limit, denounce practices intended to fragmentise, and heal what has been violently torn apart. On the basis of vv. 26–28 and five other New Testament texts, Jason Goroncy
719697 B.W. Longenecker, “The Poor of Galatians 2:10: The Interpretative Paradigm of the First Centuries”, in: B.W. Longenecker and K.D. Liebengood (eds.), Engaging Economics: New Testament Scenarios and Early Christian Reception (New Testament Scenarios and Early Christian Reception, Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2009), pp. 205–221. See also earlier: B.W. Longenecker, “Good News to the Poor: Jesus, Paul, and Jerusalem”, in: T.D. Still (ed.), Jesus and Paul Reconnected: Fresh Pathways into an Old Debate (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2007), pp. 37–65.
(2017) argues that believers’ new identity in Christ does not annul their other identities, but it means that all boundary markers have to be removed. Michel Gourgues
720698 J. Im, “Euergetism in Greco-Roman Antiquity and in Early Christianity”, Canon & Culture 8:2 (2014), pp. 269–303.
https://doi.org/10.31280/CC.2014.10.8.2.269
(2017) notes that v. 28 is probably a pre-Pauline baptismal tradition going back to the first generation of believers, thus reflecting the conviction that in Christ, inequalities may not be maintained anymore. This is very important for the notion of equal dignity in current times. Nikki Holland
721699 E.L. Miller, “Is Galatians 3:28 the Great Egalitarian Text?”, The Expository Times 114:1 (2002), pp. 9–11.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001452460211400103
(2018) reads the Letter to Philemon in the light of v. 28. In Philemon, Paul supersedes earthly hierarchies by means of the notion of fellowship in several different ways: by highlighting Onesimus’s role, by portraying Gentiles as family members and by addressing Apphia as an equal.According to Stephen J. Patterson
722700 A.D. Clarke, “Jew and Greek, Slave and Free, Male and Female: Paul’s Theology of Ethnic, Social and Gender Inclusiveness in Romans 16”, in: P. Oakes (ed.), Rome in the Bible and the Early Church (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2002), pp. 103–125.
(2018), vv. 26–28 contain the oldest ancient creed of Christianity. Paul did not create it and did not fully accept it, but by quoting it, he preserved it. Patterson emphasises that this creed did not focus on salvation but on the commitment of the first believers to fight against social distinctions classifying certain people as inferior and explains in detail how the creed functioned in Early Christianity. Luca Castiglioni
723701 J.H. Elliott, “The Jesus Movement Was Not Egalitarian but Family-Oriented”, Biblical Interpretation 11:2 (2003), pp. 173–210.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156851503765661276
(2019) investigates Paul’s views on equality as depicted in vv. 26–28, 1 Corinthians 7:17–24 and 12:1–31. Castiglioni concludes that Paul bases the notion of equality between people on the unity of God’s children in Christ. Jakobus M. Vorster
724702 D.A. Campbell, “Reconciliation in Paul: The Gospel of Negation and Transcendence in Galatians 3.28”, in: C.E. Gunton (ed.), The Theology of Reconciliation (London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2003), pp. 39–65.
(2019) considers the value of v. 28 for equality as a human right. This verse was revolutionary in the sense that it annulled all forms of superiority and this principle is still very important for developing equality as a value in the discourse on human rights. Studies on “no longer Jew or Greek”Miroslav Kocúr
725703 D.A. Campbell, The Quest for Paul’s Gospel: A Suggested Strategy (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplements 274, London/New
(2003) discusses Paul’s treatment of nationality/ethnicity in this pericope and in Romans 10:12–21. These texts show that Paul regarded Jewishness as something temporary and of limited importance and instead promoted a new form of self-identification in Christ. Kocúr also points out the implications of this insight for believers of our time. Lung-kwong Lo
726
York NY: T & T Clark International, 2005), pp. 95–111. For a critical response, see: Joel Thomas Chopp, “Unearthing Paul’s Ethics: Douglas Campbell on Creation, Redemption, and the Christian Moral Life”, Journal of Theological Interpretation 11:2 (2017), pp. 259–276.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567661289
https://doi.org/10.5325/jtheointe.11.2.0259
(2010) disagrees with scholars who interpret this verse as annulling ethnic diversity and argues that one should instead take both unity and diversity among different ethnic groups seriously. William S. Campbell
727704 K. Ehrensperger, “Scriptural Reasoning: The Dynamic That Informed Paul’s Theologizing”, Irish Biblical Studies 26:1 (2004), pp. 32–52.
(2013) is also of the opinion that Paul did not oppose all ethnic distinctions. From his letters, it is clear that he distinguished between Jews and Greeks. He thus did not advocate cultural or social uniformity. Studies on “no longer slave or free”In a book on enslaved leadership in Early Christianity, Katherine A. Shaner
728705 Op. cit., p. 50.
(2018) draws attention to ambiguities in Paul’s letters about slavery. On the one hand, v. 28 states that distinctions between slaves and the free are irrelevant, yet on the other hand Paul’s position on manumission in 1 Corinthians 7:20–24 is ambiguous.Studies on “no longer male and female”Martin Ebner
729706 M. Serres, “Ego credo”, Contagion 12/13 (2006), pp. 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.1353/ctn.0.0016
(2000) points out that the baptismal formula in vv. 27–28 was revolutionary in terms of the usual ancient social experience but that Paul did not always keep to it as 1 Corinthians 11:2–16 shows. V. 28 was thus a catalyst for defining gender roles in a new way but did not offer such a definition itself. Klara Butting
730707 D. Woodard-Lehman, “One in Christ Who Lives Within: Dispersive Universality and the Pneuma-Somatics of Identity”, The Bible & Critical Theory 3:3 (2007), pp. 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.2104/bc070039
(2000) discusses various Pauline receptions of the promise in Genesis 2:24 in v. 28, 1 Corinthians 6:13–17, 7:32–34 and Ephesians 5:30–32, arguing that the way in which Paul does so liberates both females and males from any form of gender polarity. According to Brigitte Kahl
731708 Op. cit., p. 1.
(2001), the reference to male/female in v. 28 is not a mere side-quotation. It fits Paul’s overall argument in the letter well and helps to replace a focus on maleness with an ethics of mutuality. In a study of patriarchy of the New Testament, Elma M. Cornelius
732709 D. Fricker, “‘Il n’y a pas l’homme et la femme’ (Ga 3,28), utopie ou défi?”, Revue des Sciences Religieuses 83:1 (2009), pp. 5–22.
https://doi.org/10.4000/rsr.482
(2002) points out that New Testament authors tend to reinforce patriarchy although there are some exceptions in their writings, such as v. 28. According to Mary Rose D’Angelo
733710 D.E. Aune, “Galatians 3:28 and the Problem of Equality in the Church and Society”, in: P. Walters (ed.), From Judaism to Christianity: Tradition and Transition: A Festschrift for Thomas H. Tobin, S.J., On the Occasion
(2002), the words “male and female” were interpreted in different ways in Paul’s time. They could be interpreted in any of the following ways: a reference to all human beings, to some kind of disadvantageous relationship or to marriage/sexual intercourse. It thus seems as if there was no more agreement in Paul’s time about the implications of the words than in our current situation. Richard Hove
734
(Novum Testamentum Supplements 136, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2010), pp. 153–183. of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004187696.i-336.49
(2002) is of the view that v. 28 states that, regardless of the distinctions made between people, all of them may become children of God but that it does not annul gender-specific roles in church and at home. Richard B. Hays
735711 B. Hansen, “All of You Are One”: The Social Vision of Gal 3.28, 1 Cor 12.13 and Col 3.11 (Library of New Testament Studies 409, London/New York NY: T & T Clark, 2010), p. 195.
(2004) highlights a tension regarding women in Paul’s symbolic world. On the one hand, one has vv. 26–28 promoting egalitarianism, but on the other hand, a pericope such as 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 suppresses women’s role in the public ministry. According to Hays, this situation is caused by Paul’s dialectical eschatology and the fact that “[t]he transformation of gender roles was not a programmatic emphasis of Paul’s mission; rather, it was an unintended consequence, as the Spirit worked in the churches.”
736712 A.E. Martínez, “Fe Cristiana, Bautismo e Identidad Social: Diálogo con Gál 3,26–29”, Revista Bíblica 73:3/4 (2011), pp. 163–186.
Austin Busch
737713 A.S. Russell, “Galatians 3:28 Beyond Status and Role: Living Anti-Structurally within Structure”, in: D.L. Matson and K.C. Richardson (eds.), One in Christ Jesus: Essays on Early Christianity and “All That Jazz”, in Honor of S. Scott Bartchy (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2014), pp. 1–19.
(2004) uses the peculiar way in which Paul presents Eve in Romans 7:7–25 to illustrate the implications of Galatians 3:28. Whereas Eve was typically interpreted in terms of a notion of passivity that was usually linked to femininity, Paul highlights an element of activity that was typically associated with masculinity, thus illustrating the implications of the text in Galatians. F. Gerald Downing
738714 D.F. Tolmie, “Oor die Interpretasie van Paulus se Uitspraak in Galasiërs 3:28”, Litnet Akademies: ’n Joernaal vir die Geesteswetenskappe, Natuurwetenskappe, Regte en Godsdienswetenskappe 11:2 (2014), pp. 331‑350.
(2005) reads v. 28 against the social background of the first century CE, emphasising that Paul’s view of women differed from commonly-held views in his time. Although he sometimes gave in to social pressure, he never explicitly retracted the statement in v. 28. Robbie F. Castleman
739715 W. Stegemann, “Hierarchisierung und Relativierung multipler Identitäten in Galater 3:28”, in: D.L. Matson and K.C. Richardson (eds.), One in Christ Jesus: Essays on Early Christianity and “All That Jazz”, in Honor of S. Scott Bartchy (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2014), pp. 20–34.
(2006) draws attention to the “and” in “no longer male and female” that is different from the other two pairs in v. 28. This shows that Paul believed that the distinction between genders was part of God’s creation and that it was upheld and redeemed in Christ. Mimi Haddad
740716 S.R. Turley, The Ritualized Revelation of the Messianic Age: Washings and Meals in Galatians and 1 Corinthians (Library of New Testament Studies 544, London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2015), pp. 29–58.
(2009) discusses views on women in Pauline texts and argues that the best way to understand Paul’s views is to read them in terms of the central expression of his thoughts as encountered in v. 28. Ben Witherington III
741717 J. Lambrecht, In Search of Meaning: Collected Notes on the New Testament (2014–2017) (Balti: Scholars’ Press, 2017), pp. 455-461.
(2009) is of the opinion that the rhetorical function of v. 28 might have been to counter the opponents’ attempts to re-establish the patriarchal order of things. However, Paul did not mean that gender distinctions between men and women disappeared. They continued to exist but did not determine one’s standing in the body of Christ. Joachim Kügler
742718 E. Padilla, “An Axis of Revolutionary Love”, Toronto Journal of Theology 33:2 (2017), pp. 181–194.
https://doi.org/10.3138/tjt.2017-0018
(2009) discusses v. 28 as an impulse for a pastoral ministry on gender roles that moves beyond the typical sex/gender divisions. Kügler first shows that it is not adequate to interpret vv. 26–28 in terms of a sex-gender duality as the text refers to various gender roles. Accordingly, one should not fall into the trap of distinguishing between “typically male” and “female” roles in the current context. François Lestang
743719 J. Goroncy, “Ethnicity, Social Identity, and the Transposable Body of Christ”, Mission Studies 34:2 (2017), pp. 220–245.
https://doi.org/10.1163/15733831-12341503
(2012) describes Paul’s view of male and female in v. 28 as an “anthropology in between”. Paul situates the male/female tension between the first and the new creation. In Christ, there exists a relational unity between them, a “transcendent complementarity”. Elian Cuvillier
744720 M. Gourgues, “‘Ni Juif ni Grec, ni esclave ni libre, ni mâle et femelle’ (Ga 3,28): Sur une contribution de la première génération chrétienne à une affirmation des droits humains”, Science et Esprit 69:2 (2017), pp. 241–262.
(2014) investigates v. 28 and Romans 1:26–27, asking where the emphasis falls: on “founding differences” (“différences fondatrices”) or on “messianic refoundation” (“refondation messianique”)? Cuvillier’s investigation identifies three propositions: unconditionally recognising a person without considering origins, quality or heritage, a radical universalism relativising all differences, and an ethics characterised by living in the messianic age. In a discussion of Paul’s view of the new being in Christ, Peter von der Osten-Sacken
745721 N. Holland, “Philemon in Light of Galatians 3:28”, Priscilla Papers 32:3 (2018), pp. 12–16.
(2014) draws attention to the fact that the wording of v. 28d reflects Genesis 1:27. This implies that the creation order does not apply where Christ reigns. Gesila Nneka Uzukwu
746722 S.J. Patterson, The Forgotten Creed: Christianity’s Original Struggle against Bigotry, Slavery, and Sexism (New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2018). See also Yolanda Dreyer’s reflection on Patterson’s work: “Remembering the ‘Oldest Creed’: Overcoming the Age-Old Anomaly”, Neotestamentica 53:2 (2019), pp. 249–269.
https://doi.org/10.1353/neo.2019.0018
(2015) interprets v. 28 in the light of Paul’s theology of promise, an important issue in Galatians 3 and 4. Because of the promise, males and females now have equal standing in Christ. This should lead to an ethics of solidarity and mutuality. On the basis of v. 28, Jennifer Slater
747723 L. Castiglioni, “Uguaglianza Battesimale e Differenze Carismatiche: La Prospettiva Paolina Fondamentale (I)”, Scuola Cattolica 147:4 (2019), pp. 667–693.
(2015) identifies inclusiveness as an important characteristic of Christian identity and explains how this can substantially make a difference and guide one towards gender inclusiveness that is meaningful. Kirsten Laurel Guidero
748724 J.M. Vorster, “The Theological-Ethical Implications of Galatians 3:28 for a Christian Perspective on Equality as a Foundational Value in the Human Rights Discourse”, In die Skriflig 53:1 (2019), pp. 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ids.v53i1.2494
(2019) discusses the way in which evangelical Christians understand vv. 26–29, in particular, the male/female distinction and argues as follows: “[U]nity in the one body of Christ does not erase differences but consists of cleaving together in and through differences. This cleaving in the midst of difference requires both the baptismal posture of conversion to Christ by forming union with one another and public accountability for interpretations, even where we disagree.”
749725 M. Kocúr, National and Religious Identity: A Study in Galatians 3,23–29 and Romans 10,12–21 (Österreichische Biblische Studien 24, Frankfurt/New York NY: Peter Lang, 2003).
Yonathan Moss
750726 L.-k. Lo, “‘Neither Jew nor Greek’: Galatians 3,28 Revisited”, Annali di Storia dell’Esegesi 27:2 (2010), pp. 25–33.
(2020) disagrees with scholars who are of the opinion that Paul’s depiction of gender in v. 28 contradicts the views found on this matter elsewhere in the Pauline writings. Moss proposes that one should not interpret such differences as a contradiction but rather see them as paradoxes. Thus, both sides of a specific difference are true and should be held in tension. Both are essential for the daily living of believers.Studies on the implications of “no longer male and female” for the ordination of women Several studies were published in which v. 28 was used to argue for the ordination of women in the current context: Christine Lienemann-Perrin
751727 W.S. Campbell, “Differentiation and Discrimination in Paul’s Ethnic Discourse”, Transformation 30:3 (2013), pp. 157–168.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0265378813490472
(2004), Elelwani B. Farisani
752728 K.A. Shaner, Enslaved Leadership in Early Christianity (New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2018).
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190275068.001.0001
(2006), N.T. Wright
753729 M. Ebner, “Wenn alle ‘ein einziger’ sein sollen: Von schönen theologischen Konzepten und ihren praktischen Problemen: Gal 3,28 und 1 Kor 11,2–16”, in: E. Klinger, S. Böhm and T. Seidl (eds.), Der Körper und die Religion: Das Problem der Konstruktion von Geschlechterrollen (Würzburg: Echter, 2000), pp. 159–183.
(2006), Philip B. Payne
754730 K. Butting, “Pauline Variations on Genesis 2.24: Speaking of the Body of Christ in the Context of the Discussion of Lifestyles”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 23:79 (2000), pp. 79–90.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0102307907
(2009) and Jim Reiher
755731 B. Kahl, “No Longer Male: Masculinity Struggles Behind Galatians 3.28?”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 23:79 (2001), pp. 37–49.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X0102307904
(2012). The way in which v. 28 is used in arguments for and against the ordination of women was set out in a publication by The Lutheran Church of Australia
756732 E.M. Cornelius, “Patriarchy and the New Testament”, Acta Patristica et Byzantina 13:1 (2002), pp. 50–65.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10226486.2002.11745703
(2005).Finally, some scholars were quite critical of Paul’s view of women: Pieter J.J. Botha
757733 M.R. D’Angelo, “Gender Refusers in the Early Christian Mission: Gal 3:28 as an Interpretation of Gen 1:27b”, in: C.A. Bobertz and D. Brakke (eds.), Reading in Christian Communities: Essays on Interpretation in the Early Church (Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity Series 14, Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2002), pp. 149–173.
(2000) describes gender relations in the first-century world as fundamentally hierarchical and inherently violent. Some New Testament texts are also investigated. With regard to v. 28, Botha is of the opinion that Paul did not really believe that there was no longer male or female in Christ: “This is an incidental outburst (or an unguarded quotation), nothing more: the thrust of the Letter, its textual world, remains unaffectedly male”.
758734 R. Hove, “Does Galatians 3:28 Negate Gender-Specific Roles?”, in: W. Grudem (ed.), Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood (Foundations for the Family Series, Wheaton IL: Crossway Books, 2002), pp. 105–143.
Shaye J.D. Cohen
759735 R.B. Hays, “Paul on the Relation between Men and Women”, in: A.-J. Levine and M. Blickenstaff (eds.), A Feminist Companion to Paul (Cleveland OH: T & T Clark International, 2004), pp. 137–147.
(2005) is of a similar view. Paul did not attempt to annul the social boundaries between men and women in v. 28. Men and women had different functions and even in the new order women were subordinate to men. 4:12–20 Jacob Cherian
760736 Op. cit., p. 146.
(2001) stresses the significance of the parental imagery that Paul uses in his letters, as happens in 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12 and Galatians 4:19–20. Paul’s use of this imagery shows that he is often misunderstood as opposing the participation of women in public worship. Benjamin J. Lappenga
761737 A. Busch, “The Figure of Eve in Romans 7:5–25”, Biblical Interpretation 12:1 (2004), pp. 1–36.
https://doi.org/10.1163/156851504322887663
(2012) draws attention to the way in which Paul redefines “the good” in this pericope: “[I]n place of the ‘good’ object of ζῆλος [“zeal”] sought by Paul’s opponents, namely, fame and the power to exclude (4:17), Paul substitutes paradoxical, cruciform weakness as the definition of ‘the good’ for zealous Christ-followers.”
762738 F.G. Downing, “The Nature(s) of Christian Women and Men”, Theology 108:843 (2005), pp. 178–184.
https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0040571X0510800303
4:30John Anthony Dunne
763739 R.F. Castleman, “The Last Word: Gender, Grace and a Greek Conjunction”, Themelios 32:1 (2006), pp. 57–59.
(2014) disagrees with scholars who interpret this verse as a warning to the recipients against embracing the law. Dunne believes that it serves as both a command and a warning and that it reflects Paul’s belief that Christian identity presupposes suffering with the crucified Christ. Paul’s views in this regard were based on his understanding of his mission in terms of the Servant of Isaiah.5:1In a study on the moral-practical relevance of the doctrine of justification, Marcus Hüttner
764740 M. Haddad, “Reading the Apostle Paul through Gal 3:28”, in: C.P. DeYoung (ed.), Coming Together in the 21st Century: The Bible’s Message in an Age of Diversity (Valley Forge PA: Judson, 2009 [1995], revised edition), pp. 73–93.
(2004) takes the importance of the concept “freedom” (in 5:1) as cue. The fact that a gracious God gives justification to people as a gift implies that faith enables them to live a humane way of life, motivated by the power of God’s liberating and encouraging love. Thomas Söding
765741 B. Witherington III, What’s in the Word: Rethinking the Socio-Rhetorical Character of the New Testament (Waco TX: Baylor University Press, 2009), pp. 113–121.
(2008) takes 5:1 as point of departure to contrast Paul’s view of freedom and current views of freedom. In Christ, people are liberated from sin and death. They are also liberated to love. Söding furthermore compares Paul’s view on free will and the way in which Stoics interpreted free will. Nina E. Livesey
766742 J. Kügler, “Gal 3,26–28 und die vielen Geschlechter der Glaubenden: Impuls für eine christliche Geschlechtsrollenpastoral jenseits von Sex and Gender”, in: M.E. Aigner and J. Pock (eds.), Geschlecht quer gedacht: Widerstandspotenziale und Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten in kirchlicher Praxis (Werkstatt Theologie 13, Münster: LIT Verlag, 2009), pp. 53–70. Republished in: J. Kügler, “Gal 3,26–28 und die vielen Geschlechter der Glaubenden: Impuls für eine christliche Geschlechtsrollenpastoral jenseits von Sex and Gender”, in: J. Kügler (ed.), Exegese zwischen Religionsgeschichte und Pastoral (Stuttgarter Biblische Aufsatzbände 64, Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2017), pp. 347–370.
(2019) agrees with the classicist Matthew Roller that ἐλευθερία (“freedom”) was never an existential category in ancient discourse but was rather used for characterising a different situation. Livesey applies this insight to 5:1, arguing that Paul used the term as a metaphor for a different position that he wished the Galatians to adopt, namely “Paul’s position, or the no-Torah, no-circumcision position”.
767743 F. Lestang, “‘Ni mâle ni femelle’ (Ga. 3,28): L’anthropologie paulinienne de l’entre-deux”, Revue de l’Université Catholique de Lyon 22 (2012), pp. 15–19. In three articles, Marinko Vidović
768744 E. Cuvillier, “‘Différences fondatrices’ ou ‘refondation messianique’: De quoi Paul est-il le nom?”, Recherches de Science Religieuse 102:2 (2014), pp. 265–275.
https://doi.org/10.3917/rsr.142.0263
(2020) explains Paul’s statement in 5:1 that Christ has set people free for freedom step by step: 1. Paul’s statement should be interpreted against the historical background of the letter and the dilemma that he faced when the Galatian churches turned to the law; 2. Paul interpreted freedom as freedom from the law. According to him, the history of salvation did not begin with the law but with Abraham’s faith, which was based on God’s promise; 3. Freedom was a spiritual state of non-slavery based on God’s promise and not on the flesh. This freedom should constantly be maintained by believers.5:6Simon Butticaz
769745 P. von der Osten-Sacken, Der Gott der Hoffnung: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Theologie des Paulus (Studien zu Kirche und Israel: Neue Folge 3, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2014), pp. 571–586.
(2017) takes 5:6 as point of departure for discussing the relationship between justification by faith and rewarding/punishment at the last judgement in the letter, and argues that the theological and ethical arguments in the letter form an organic whole in that individuals justified without the law will appear before the Lord as judge and are thus called upon to practise a corresponsive ethos that is inclusive and reciprocal.5:12One of the examples that Jeremy F. Hultin
770746 G.N. Uzukwu, The Unity of Male and Female in Jesus Christ: An Exegetical Study of Galatians 3.28c in Light of Paul’s Theology of Promise (Library of New Testament Studies: International Studies on Christian Origins 531, London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2015).
(2008) considers in a book on the ethics of obscene speech in Early Christianity and its environment comes from 5:12. According to Hultin, Paul’s statement was sharp but should not be categorised as an example of obscene speech.5:13–14Peter G. Kirchschlaeger
771747 J. Slater, “‘Inclusiveness’ – An Authentic Biblical Truth That Negates Distinctions: A Hermeneutic of Gender Incorporation and Ontological Equality in Ancient Christian Thought”, Journal of Early Christian History 5:1 (2015), pp. 116–131.
https://doi.org/10.1080/2222582X.2015.11877319
(2014) investigates the relationship between freedom, love, the Spirit and the flesh according to 5:13: the Spirit directs the freedom of believers, thereby moving them away from the flesh towards lives characterised by love. According to Gideon Baker
772748 K.L. Guidero, “‘No Longer Any Male and Female’? Galatians 3, Baptismal Identity, and the Question of an Evangelical Hermeneutic”, Priscilla Papers 33:3 (2019), pp. 19–27.
(2020), Paul’s reduction of the dual commandment (love of God and the neighbour) to love of the neighbour in 5:13 and Romans 13:9 should be understood in terms of his messianic perspective on worldliness. Since he thinks of one’s neighbour as somebody living right next to one in this world, he reduces love of God to love of one’s neighbour. Baker also refers to the contributions of Heidegger and Agamben in this investigation. In a study of Pauline ethics in 5:13–14 and Romans 13:8–10, Mariapushpam Paulraj
773749 Op. cit., p. 25.
(2020) argues that Paul correctly makes Jesus’ proclamation of love the foundation of his ethics but that one should also take note of the fact that he tends to reduce love to insiders in his exhortations and that this might cause the church to become inward-looking.5:17Otto Hofius
774750 Y. Moss, “From Contradiction to Paradox: A New Perspective on Galatians 3,28”, Marriage, Families & Spirituality 26:1 (2020), pp. 26–40.
https://doi.org/10.2143/int.26.1.3288947
(2003) disagrees with scholars who interpret this verse as indicating a constant battle between the Spirit and the flesh in the lives of believers. Hofius thinks that believers still experience temptation but are expected not to succumb to it – something they will achieve if they do not restrict the Spirit. According to Jean-Noël Aletti
775751 C. Lienemann-Perrin, “The Biblical Foundations for a Feminist and Participatory Theology of Mission”, International Review of Mission 93:368 (2004), pp. 17–34.
(2014), it is wrong to interpret this verse negatively as if it depicts believers as being ethically paralysed. Paul does not portray them as enslaved by the flesh or left to their own resources. They can allow the Spirit to guide them. 5:19–23René A. López
776752 E.B. Farisani, “The Use of Galatians 3:28 in Promoting Gender Equality”, Journal of Constructive Theology 12:1 (2006), pp. 53–65.
(2012) is of the opinion that Paul wishes to exhort Galatian believers by means of the vice list in 5:19–21. He wants them to stop performing “the works of the flesh” and instead allow the position that they have in Christ to enable them to live according to the Spirit. Matthew Myer Boulton
777753 N.T. Wright, “The Biblical Basis for Women’s Service in the Church”, Priscilla Papers 20:4 (2006), pp. 5–10.
(2016) explains the meaning of “self-control” in v. 23 as follows: “It is our inner strength, but at a deeper level it is the strength of the Spirit flowing in us and through us. In this sense it is a participation in the Spirit’s vitality and vigor. It is within us, but it is also something we are within.”
778754 P.B. Payne, Man and Woman, One in Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Paul’s Letters (Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan, 2009), pp. 79–104. 5:20James A. Kelhoffer
779755 J. Reiher, “Galatians 3:28 – Liberating for Women’s Ministry? Or of Limited Application?”, The Expository Times 123:6 (2012), pp. 272–277.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014524611431773
(2007) responds critically to the remarks of William V. Harris
780756 Anon., “Galatians 3:26 – 29 and the Ordination of Women”, Lutheran Theological Journal 39:1 (2005), pp. 84–93.
about anger management in the Pauline letters. Amongst others, Kelhoffer refers to this verse. Furthermore, Kelhoffer argues that the anger that Paul expressed toward Peter in Antioch was not consistent with Paul’s own expectations of others but that he probably would have regarded his anger as justified5:24–26Oda Wischmeyer
781757 P.J.J. Botha, “Submission and Violence: Exploring Gender relations in the First-Century World”, Neotestestamentica 34:1 (2000), pp. 1–38.
(2013) disagrees with scholars who read 5:24–26 and Philippians 3:20 politically. According to Wischmeyer, these texts do not focus on political issues and do not have the city as theme. They are ethical texts in which Paul attempts to develop and strengthen the ethos of believers.6:1James P. Sweeney
782758 Op. cit., p. 28.
(2003) draws attention to Paul’s statement on spiritual restoration in 6:1, emphasising two issues: that Paul assumes that the Galatian believers already possess the Spirit but that they are still vulnerable to temptation and thus have a pastoral responsibility towards each other.6:2Tadeusz Knut
783759 S.J.D. Cohen, Why Aren’t Jewish Women Circumcised? Gender and Covenant in Judaism (Berkeley CA/Los Angeles CA/London: University of California Press, 2005), pp. 72–73.
https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520212503.001.0001
(2016) describes this verse as an incentive by Paul to believers to help sinners carry their burdens (with “burdens” to be taken as moral “weight” caused by sinning) so that conversion can take place. Jacobus de Koning
784760 J. Cherian, “Paul: A Mother to His Churches: A Brief Examination of Parental Imagery in 1 Thess. 2:1–12 and Gal. 4:19–20”, Dharma Deepika 5:1 (2001), pp. 35–47.
(2017) identifies this verse as the guideline for Christian ethics in the new dispensation. According to it, the law is replaced by the crucified Christ. De Koning also works out the implications of this insight for believers in South Africa.6:2 (“the law of Christ”)Claude Pigeon
785761 B.J. Lappenga, “Misdirected Emulation and Paradoxical Zeal: Paul’s Redefinition of ‘The Good’ as Object of ζήλος in Galatians 4:12–20”, Journal of Biblical Literature 131:4 (2012), pp. 775–796.
https://doi.org/10.2307/23488267
Updated version: B.J. Lappenga, Paul’s Language of ζῆλος: Monosemy and the Rhetoric of Identity and Practice (Biblical Interpretation Series 137, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2016), pp. 118–140.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004302457
(2000) identifies three different ways in which the expression “the law of Christ” has been interpreted by scholars: the reinterpretation of the Mosaic law by Christ, a concept used by Paul’s opponents and a reference to the commandment of love. Pigeon opts for interpreting it as a reference to mutual support, thus manifesting the love emanating from the Christian community, a commandment addressed to all members. Michael Winger
786762 Op. cit., p. 777.
(2000) believes that the expression “the law of Christ” does not refer to any legal instruction. It is rather a metaphor denoting the lordship of Christ over believers which practically implies that their lives are taken over by the Spirit. In a study of Paul’s use of the term “law” plus the genitive, J. Louis Martyn
787763 J.A. Dunne, “Cast out the Aggressive Agitators (Gl 4:29–30): Suffering, Identity, and the Ethics of Expulsion in Paul’s Mission to the Galatians”, in: J. Kok, T. Nicklas, D.T. Roth and C.M. Hays (eds.), Sensitivity Towards Outsiders: Exploring the Dynamic Relationship between Mission and Ethics in the New Testament and Early Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.364, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 246–269.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157504-4
(2003) also discusses the expression “the law of Christ”. According to Martyn, “Paul coins that expression in order to speak of the Law as it has been taken in hand by Christ, thus being delivered from its lethal alliance with Sin and made pertinent to the church’s daily life.”
788764 M. Hüttner, Zur Freiheit befreit (Gal 5,1): Die moralisch-praktische Relevanz der Rechtfertigungslehre (Bamberger Theologische Studien 25, Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2004).
In a chapter on the expression “the law of Christ”, Graham Stanton
789765 T. Söding, “Zur Freiheit befreit (Gal 5,1): Paulus und die Kritik der Autonomie”, Internationale Katholische Zeitschrift/Communio 37:2 (2008), pp. 92–112.
(2004) investigates several interpretations of the expression over time. Stanton opts for understanding it as referring to the Mosaic law as it was interpreted by Christ, having as its essence the love commandment and a willingness to carry the burdens of others. Todd A. Wilson
790766 N.E. Livesey, “Is Freedom an Existential Category in Ancient Discourse?”, Biblical Interpretation 27:2 (2019), pp. 274–297.
https://doi.org/10.1163/15685152-00272p06
(2006) offers an overview of the shift in the way in which the expression “the law of Christ” is interpreted. Formerly scholars tended to take it as referring to something replacing the Mosaic law, but now more and more scholars prefer to link it directly to the Mosaic law. Wilson also points out the implications of this development. According to Femi Adeyemi
791767 Op. cit., p. 296.
(2006), the law that Jeremiah refers to in Jeremiah 33:33 should be identified with “the law of Christ” that Paul mentions in 1 Corinthians 9:21 and Galatians 6:2. Jerome Murphy-O’Connor
792768 M. Vidović, “‘Za Slobodu Nas Krist Oslobodi’ (Gal 5,1) – Poimanje Slobode u Poslanici Galaćanima (I: Sintagma u Povijesnom Kontekstu Poslanice i Kristološke Vjere)”, Nova Prisutnost 18:1 (2020), pp. 115–126,
https://doi.org/10.31192/np.18.1.9
, M. Vidović, “‘Za Slobodu Nas Krist Oslobodi’ (Gal 5,1) – Poimanje Slobode u Poslanici Galaćanima (II: Sloboda kao Sloboda od Zakona)”, Nova Prisutnost 18:2 (2020), pp. 397–407, https://doi.org/10.31192/np.18.2.11, M. Vidović, “‘Za Slobodu nas Krist Oslobodi’ (Gal 5,1) – Poimanje Slobode u Poslanici Galaćanima (III: Sloboda kao Status Ne-Robovanja i Afirmativno Opredjeljenje Za)”, Nova Prisutnost 18:3 (2020), pp. 625–640,
https://doi.org/10.31192/np.18.3.13
(2012) interprets the expression “the law of Christ” as meaning “the law which is Christ”, which makes sense if one keeps Philo’s notion of a person as “a living law” (a notion going back to ideas related to Hellenistic kingship) in mind. Francesco Bianchini
793769 S. Butticaz, “‘La foi agissant par l’amour’ (Galates 5,6): Justification par la foi et parénèse du jugement dans la Lettre aux Galates”, Biblica 98:1 (2017), pp. 91–111.
https://doi.org/10.2143/BIB.98.1.3197387
(2013) detects a coherent development in Paul’s references to the law in 5:13–6:10 (in particular in 5:14, 23 and 6:2) culminating in 6:2 where Paul claims that believers do not need the law of Moses anymore, since they have “the law of Christ” and are guided by the Spirit. Ho Hyung Cho
794770 J.F. Hultin, The Ethics of Obscene Speech in Early Christianity and Its Environment (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 128, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2008), pp. 148–150.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004168039.i-279
(2015) interprets the expression “the law of Christ” as referring to a principle created by Christ and not to any written laws, such as the Mosaic law or any other written law. In another study, Cho
795771 P.G. Kirchschlaeger, “The Relation between Freedom, Love, Spirit and Flesh in Galatians 5:13”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 19 (2014), pp. 130–142.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2S.7
(2019) offers an overview of the meaning of the expression “the law of Christ” in 6:2, Barnabas 2:6 and Ignatius’s Letter to the Magnesians and comes to the same conclusion. It refers to the principal characteristic of the new era that Christ inaugurated. Arland J. Hultgren
796772 G. Baker, “Paul’s Reduction of the Dual Commandment: The Significance of Worldliness to Messianic Life”, Political Theology 21:7 (2020), pp. 606–622.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1462317x.2020.1787603
(2019) understands “the law of Christ” as the guidance that believers in Christ experience because they are led by the Spirit. Accordingly, their actions are directed by the love commandment so that they serve one another.6:1–6John M.G. Barclay
797773 M. Paulraj, “Love of Neighbour: The Axis of Pauline Ethics: A Brief Study of Gal 5:13–14 and Rom 13:8–10”, Jnanadeepa 24:1 (2020), pp. 74–94.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4060142
(2014) thinks that in 6:1–6, Paul gives the Galatians a series of maxims to protect them from the disparaging influence of a contest-culture dominated by a strife for honour. Paul expects them to behave in a way corresponding to the nature of the Christ-event as an unconditioned gift from God. 6:10On the basis of 6:10, Kjetil Fretheim
798774 O. Hofius, “Widerstreit zwischen Fleisch und Geist? Erwägungen zu Gal 5, 17”, in: U. Mittmann-Richert, F. Avemarie and G.S. Oegema (eds.), Der Mensch vor Gott: Forschungen zum Menschenbild in Bibel, antikem Judentum und Koran: Festschrift Hermann Lichtenberger (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2003), pp. 147–159. Also available in: O. Hofius, Exegetische Studien (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.223, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), pp. 161–172. https://doi.org/
10.1628/978-3-16-151512-5
For a response to Hofius’s contribution, see J. Lambrecht, “Once Again Galatians 5,17: Grammar and Logic in the Exegesis of O. Hofius”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 89:1 (2013), pp. 113–115.
https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.89.1.2985327
(2008) argues that one should view Christian ethics as a communitarian type of ethics and that it should be guided by a preference for poor people.
16.4 Wirkungsgeschichte
Michael McGhee
799775 J.-N. Aletti, “Paul’s Exhortations in Galatians 5:16–25: From the Apostle’s Techniques to His Theology ”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 318–335.
(2002) believes that finding commonalities between different religions may be deceptive. Although 6:10 and a passage from the Buddhist Mahavagga may sound the same, one should look at how things are understood and practised. Without this perspective, interfaith dialogue will remain shallow. Álvaro Michelín Salomón
800776 R.A. López, “Paul’s Vice List in Galatians 5:19–21”, Bibliotheca Sacra 169:673 (2012), pp. 48–67. See also (more generally): R.A. López, “Views on Paul’s Vice Lists and Inheriting the Kingdom”, Bibliotheca Sacra 168:669 (2011), pp. 81–97.
(2004) draws attention to the importance of the ethical guidelines in 5:22–23 for believers in our time. Paul does not distinguish between ecclesial and secular life. Everything that one does must be a manifestation of Christ and the Spirit. Johann-Albrecht Meylahn
801777 M.M. Boulton, “Self-Control”, Journal for Preachers 39:4 (2016), pp. 55‑58.
(2005) uses the notion of freedom in Christ as depicted in Galatians (an eschatological liberty of calling and promise) to help people handle the immense ethical challenges posed by postmodernity. Khiok-khng Yeo
802778 Op. cit., p. 58.
(2005) compares li in The Analects and the law in Galatians, drawing out the implications of li and the law for contemporary society. Yeo suggests that the goal of living by li and the law is the common good. In a second study, Yeo
803779 J.A. Kelhoffer, “Suppressing Anger in Early Christianity: Examples from the Pauline Tradition”, Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 47:3 (2007), pp. 307–325. Also available in: J.A. Kelhoffer, Conceptions of “Gospel” and Legitimacy in Early Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.324, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 317–334.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152993-1
(2006) compares the concepts of xin (trust) in Confucius and pistis in Paul and demonstrates how Confucius might help one to interpret Paul. In a third contribution, Yeo
804780 W.V. Harris, Restraining Rage: The Ideology of Anger Control in Classical Antiquity (Cambridge MA/London: Harvard University Press, 2001).
(2006) uses an intertextual reading of Confucius and Galatians for constructing a Chinese Christian identity. According to Yeo, Christ fulfils Confucian ethics, protects China from the anomalies of Western Christian history and protects the universal church from the anomalies of Chinese history. In a fourth contribution, Yeo
805781 O. Wischmeyer, “Philippi und Jerusalem: Sind Phil 3,20 und Gal 4,24–26 politische oder ethische Texte?”, Theologische Zeitschrift 69:4 (2013), pp. 298–319.
https://doi.org/10.5169/seals-877668
(2009) investigates the theme of moral freedom and human nature in Confucius and Galatians. According to Yeo, there is widespread agreement between Paul and Confucius, but Christ broadens or adds what is absent or implicit in Confucius and Confucius stresses aspects of Christian belief that are underplayed by Western Christians. In a book published in 2008, Yeo
806782 J.P. Sweeney, “The ‘Spiritual’ Task of Restoration: A Brief Note on Galatians 6:1”, The Expository Times 114:8 (2003), pp. 259–261.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001452460311400803
gathers the insights from nearly two decades of cross-cultural interpretation of The Analects and Pauline literature, in particular, Galatians. Yeo maintains that it is possible to be both Chinese and Christian, i.e., to be a Chinese Christian, and shows how one can integrate insights from the Confucian tradition and from Paul on issues such as virtue ethics, violence, political ethics and being human in a world full of difference. Peter Mageto
807783 T. Knut, “Analiza Egzegetyczna Wypowiedzi św. Pawła Apostoła ‘Jeden Drugiego Brzemiona Noście’ (Ga 6,2) w Kontekście Ga 6,1–5”, Studia Koszalińsko-Kołobrzeskie 23 (2016), pp. 43–54.
https://doi.org/10.18276/skk.2016.23-03
(2006) highlights the ethics of shared responsibility underlying 5:13–15 and points out the implication for churches in the current context. This type of ethics provides one with a model for Christian unity where groups can be enriched by other groups. In the light of 5:3 and 13, Burchell K. Taylor
808784 J. de Koning, “Die Riglyn vir Christen Etiek: Galasiërs 6:2 onder die Loep”, In die Skriflig 51:1 (2017), pp. 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ids.v51i1.2205
(2008) argues that freedom is both a gift and a demand. Taylor appropriates this as follows: Although slave trade has officially been abolished, other unjust systems still impact negatively on the descendants of slaves, and the church thus has to continue the fight for true freedom. Kyung-Sik Hyun
809785 C. Pigeon, “‘La loi du Christ’ en Galates 6,2”, Studies in Religion 29:4 (2000), pp. 425–438.
(2009) is of the opinion that the gospel was inculturated in Galatia by means of the ethical behaviour of believers, behaviour characterised by equality, love and freedom. Hyun appropriates this for missionaries currently in Asia. They should have consensus on what the gospel entails and should try to foster a culture characterised by equality, love and freedom. G.N. Toryough and S.O. Okanlawon
810786 M. Winger, “The Law of Christ”, New Testament Studies 46:4 (2000), pp. 537–546.
(2014) point out that, in the light of Genesis 12:1–3, the blessing that Paul refers to in 3:13–14 should be understood in a spiritual and not a material sense as many prosperity preachers tend to interpret it. Rather, it refers to sonship of God. Jennifer Slater
811787 J.L. Martyn, “Nomos Plus Genitive Noun in Paul: The History of God’s Law”, in: J.T. Fitzgerald, T.H. Olbricht and L.M. White (eds.), Early Christianity and Classical Culture: Comparative Studies in Honor of Abraham J. Malherbe (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 110, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2003), pp. 575–587.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047402190_028
(2014) explains how what is theologically implicit in Paul’s call to freedom in 5:1 can be made explicit in South Africa, especially by countering corruption. In another contribution, Slater
812788 Op. cit., p. 583.
(2016) uses 3:28 as a point of departure for outlining a way to cultivate an inclusive type of diversity in South Africa. According to Zorodzai Dube
813789 G. Stanton, Jesus and Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 110–123.
https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511616976
(2015), the way in which Paul contrasts the image of Abraham with that of Moses in Galatians (Abraham was the public image best representing cosmopolitan and heterogeneous identity in the Hellenistic setup) can help one to understand the debate about statues in South Africa. Bartosz Adamski
814790 T.A. Wilson, “The Law of Christ and the Law of Moses: Reflections on a Recent Trend in Interpretation”, Currents in Biblical Research 5:1 (2006), pp. 123–144.
(2015) outlines Aquinas’s views on the freedom in Christ in his comments on Galatians 5 and its contemporary relevance. Freedom is achieved through union with Christ and love is the gift whereby freedom becomes a reality. Emily A. Peck-McClain
815791 F. Adeyemi, “The New Covenant Law and the Law of Christ”, Bibliotheca Sacra 163:652 (2006), pp. 438–452.
(2015) considers the implications of the notion of agency in Paul’s letters for adolescent girls. The type of agency depicted in 2:20 can offer liberation and hope for adolescent girls, since it is possible to live in the faith in/of Christ even though the power of sin has not been conquered fully. Lovemore Togarasei
816792 J. Murphy-O’Connor, “The Unwritten Law of Christ (Gal 6:2)”, Revue Biblique 119:2 (2012), pp. 213–231. Also available in: J. Murphy-O’Connor, Keys to Galatians: Collected Essays (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 2012), pp. 123–143.
(2016) points out that Christianity has still not succeeded in providing an alternative identity to ethnicity in Africa. Accordingly, Togarasei investigates the implications of Pauline texts such as 3:28 for Christian identity in this continent.
17. Missiology
Lucien Legrand
817793 F. Bianchini, “Il νόμος in Gal 5,13–6,10”, Biblica 94:1 (2013), pp. 47–62.
(2001) discusses Paul’s missionary strategy in terms of ancient geography. According to Legrand, at the Jerusalem meeting, ideas on which parts of the world could be regarded as Judaised or not, played a role. From 2:9, it is clear that Europe (regarded as not Judaised) was given to Paul as missionary field, whereas Peter, James and John received the diaspora in Africa and the East as their missionary fields. Michael W. Payne
818794 H.H. Cho, “The Study of the Meaning of Ό ΝΟΜΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ in Galatians 6:2”, 신약연구 14:4 (2015), pp. 516–543.
(2002) suggests a new missiological approach in the light of the rise in ethnic violence by focusing on the notion of identity in the light of insights offered by Miroslav Wolf. From Galatians, Payne utilises the notions of being new people in Christ and Paul’s focus on centred-set thinking. Christine Lienemann-Perrin
819795 H.H. Cho, “ὁ νόμος τοῦ Χριστοῦ Reconsidered: A Fresh Look at Galatians 6:2, Barnabas 2:6, and Magnesians 2”, Canon & Culture 13:1 (2019), pp. 263–294.
(2004) points out that the Early Church did not follow the spirit of 3:28 and did not allow women to take part in mission. Nevertheless, there were women in the Early Church that prepared the way for women to participate later in mission. This (subversive) tradition in the Early Church should be followed in our times. In an analysis of 1:11–24, Elvis Elengabeka
820796 A.J. Hultgren, “The Ethical Reorientation of Paul: From the Law of Moses to the Law of Christ”, Currents in Theology and Mission 46:2 (2019), pp. 30–33.
(2007) highlights the way in which charismatic initiative and institutional regulation were joined. For current missionaries, this shows that trust in an institution and faithfulness to the Spirit are both important. They should thus cultivate their personal creativity but also always be open for inputs from the side of the institution. J.W. Maris
821797 J.M.G. Barclay, “Grace and the Countercultural Reckoning of Worth: Community Construction in Galatians 5–6”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 306–317.
(2008) focuses on the missionary task of the church, in particular in the light of the fact that the heavenly Jerusalem is called “mother” in 4:26. Maris argues that the church cannot claim these heavenly qualities directly. It should rather use the mother image to view itself critically and to focus on mission. In a contribution on missional perspectives in Galatians, Jeremy Punt
822798 K. Fretheim, “Grums i Galaterbrevet: Om Kristen Etikk, Paulus og den Prioriterte Andre”, Tidsskrift for Teologi og Kirke 79:2 (2008), pp. 113–129.
https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1504-2952-2008-02-03
(2009) highlights Paul’s concern for the identity of the Galatians, the significance of his claims about justification and the impact of apocalyptic notions on Paul’s view of God. In the light of these insights, Punt challenges the church to come to terms with the radical spiritual, social and cosmic aspects of peace. In a contribution on missiological perspectives in certain pericopes in Galatians, Bernard Y. Quarshie
823799 M. McGhee, “Editorial: Greeks, Galatians and Western Buddhists: Christianity, Buddhism, and ‘Social Responsibility’”, Contemporary Buddhism: An Interdisciplinary Journal 3:2 (2002), pp. 99–109.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14639940208573760
(2009) stresses the importance of focusing on the crucified Christ, the vital role of preaching, the need for appreciating the vulnerability of both preachers and converts, as well as the importance of continuing one’s spiritual life in the Spirit. John Mansford Prior
824800 Á. Michelín Salomón, “El Fruto del Espíritu: Acerca de la Carta a los Gálatas”, Cuadernos de Teología 23 (2004), pp. 31–43.
(2010) points out that 3:27–28 is mostly interpreted in a spiritualised way by minority Christian groups in Indonesia and thus thinks that it is a missiological imperative to move to a social reading of the text so that its radical egalitarian claim may be manifested in South East Asian societies. Jacobus Kok
825801 J.-A. Meylahn, “Called into the Freedom of Christ in a Postmodern Age and the Moral Debate”, Verbum et Ecclesia 26:3 (2005), pp. 740–755.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ve.v26i3.248
(2011) highlights the important relationship between mission and ethics in Galatians. One thus should not study the one without the other. Contact with the gospel changes one’s identity and leads to the development of new ethical values. In Galatians, Paul’s ethics indirectly implies mission, thus pointing to the close link between mission and ethics. Michael Knowles
826802 K.-K. Yeo, “Li and Law in the Analects and Galatians: A Chinese Christian Understanding of Ritual and Property”, The Asia Journal of Theology 19:2 (2005), pp. 309–332. See also the reprint of a work originally published in 1998: K.-K. Yeo, What Has Jerusalem to do with Beijing? Biblical Interpretation from a Chinese Perspective (Contrapuntal Readings of the Bible in World Christianity 2, Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2018).
(2011) points out that Christianity, Judaism and Islam are nowadays usually regarded as “Abrahamic religions”. However, in the light of Galatians, Islam should not be called an “Abrahamic” religion. Richard Last
827803 K.-K. Yeo, “On Confucian xin and Pauline pistis”, Sino-Christian Studies 2 (2006), pp. 25–51.
(2011) raises the question as to what Paul thought the purpose of his mission was. After an investigation of several Pauline texts, amongst others from Galatians, Last concludes: “The apostle understood the purpose of his mission as preparing individuals for the eschaton — which meant getting individuals to believe in Christ and getting them involved in local Christ-believing communities before the parousia.”
828804 K.-K. Yeo, “Musing with Confucius (the Analects) and Paul (Galatians) on a ‘Theological-Cultural’ Chinese Journey”, The Asia Journal of Theology 20:2 (2006), pp. 385–398.
Ed Mackenzie
829805 K.-K. Yeo, “An Intertextual Reading of Moral Freedom in the Analects and Galatians”, in: S.E. Porter and M.J. Boda (eds.), Translating the New Testament: Text, Translation, Theology (McMaster New Testament Studies, Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2009), pp. 271–289.
(2012) points out that the Emerging Church emphasises three aspects in its attempt to contextualise the gospel, mystery, journey and conversation but that such an approach differs from Paul’s missiological approach in Galatians, since he stresses the coherency of the gospel, the importance of conversion and the obligation to proclaim the gospel. According to Jeremy Punt
830806 K.-K. Yeo, Musing with Confucius and Paul: Toward a Chinese Christian Theology (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2008), pp. 53–109.
(2014), in Galatians, Paul is primarily concerned about the community to whom he writes the letter and its identity, and not so much about outsiders. Outsiders are mentioned in the letter, but Paul refers to them quite harshly. Cheon Seol Han
831807 P. Mageto, “Toward an Ethic of Shared Responsibility in Galatians 5:13–15”, Evangelical Review of Theology 30:1 (2006), pp. 86–94.
(2015) explains why a missiological reading of Galatians is helpful. The letter focuses primarily on safeguarding the congregation against Paul’s opponents, thus foregrounding issues such as identity. A missional reading focuses on a different issue, the attitude of the congregation towards outsiders. According to Peter J. Leithart
832808 B.K. Taylor, “Abolished, but Not Destroyed: Freedom – Gift and Demand (Gal 5.2,13)”, Reformed World 58:1 (2008), pp. 30–35.
(2016), God reconfigures the fallen situation in which humankind finds itself (under “the elements of the world”) so that a new community is formed, operating in a different way. God does this by imparting to them a new nature. Leithart also works out the implication of this idea for missiology. Anselmo Ernesto Graff and Evaldo Luis Pauly
833809 K.-S. Hyun, “Inculturation of the Gospel in Galatians”, 한국기독교신학논총 63 (2009), pp. 57–76.
(2017) identify a two-dimensional missiological structure in Luther’s lectures on Genesis and Galatians, consisting of a vertical dimension (it is exclusively God’s work) and a horizontal dimension (it is the responsibility of believers). According to Jacobus Kok and John Anthony Dunne
834810 G.N. Toryough and S.O. Okanlawon, “The Blessing of Abraham: Seeking an Interpretive Link between Genesis 12:1–3 and Galatians 3:13–16”, Ilorin Journal of Religious Studies 4:1 (2014), pp. 123–136.
(2017), from Galatians, it is clear that Paul did not view participation as some kind of ecstatic experience, removing believers from the world. It was primarily missionally motivated. This is clear from the way in which he understood his own calling and from what he expected from the Galatians. According to Peder Borgen
835811 J. Slater, “Freedom: The Liberative Value and Ethical Credential for Christian Living in South Africa”, Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 148 (2014), pp. 48–64.
(2018), 3:1–14 offers us insight into Paul’s perspective as a missionary to the Gentiles. In this passage, Paul distinguishes between two jurisdictions, a Sinaitic one and an Abrahamic one, and uses the expression “in Jesus Christ” to refer to Christ in a collective sense and to the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham that believers now experience. Michael L. Sweeney
836812 J. Slater, “Intersecting Culture, Values and Transformation in Shaping an Integrated Ethnic Identity within a Diastratically Variated Society: Employing South Africa as a Case Study”, Verbum et Ecclesia 37:1 (2016), pp. 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/ve.v37i1.1598
(2019) regards the collection mentioned in 2:10 as an expression of Christian solidarity between different areas in Early Christianity. Sweeney also considers the missiological implications of the event, in particular the underlying values and motives that Paul expressed by his actions.
18. Eschatology and apocalypticism
18.1 Eschatology
According to Hubert Ordon
837813 Z. Dube, “The Statue Debate: Ancestors and ‘Mnemonic Energy’ in Paul and Now”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 71:3 (2015), pp. 1–5.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v71i3.3035
(2001), 4:4 is the literary and theological centre of 4:1–7. It focuses on the soteriological turning point of personal and world history, with Christ’s incarnation as an event bringing time to its full measure. Paul’s “fullness of time” thus also becomes the “middle of time”, summum temporis. Michel Gourgues
838814 B. Adamski, “Wolność w Chrystusie: Aktualność Nauczania Św: Tomasza z Akwinu o Wolności Chrześcijańskiej na Podstawie Piątego Rozdziału Super Epistolam S. Pauli Apostoli ad Galatas Lectura”, Biblica et Patristica Thoruniensia 8:3 (2015), pp. 15–25.
https://doi.org/10.12775/BPTh.2015.014
(2001) discusses the notion of the fullness/fulfilment of time in three traditions: Mark 1:15, Galatians 4:4 and Ephesians 1:10. Gourgues shows that the expression has a specific connotation in each context and that it refers to different events. According to Mark, time reached a peak because of the advent of the Kingdom of God; according to Galatians, time “switched” from the time of the law to the time of faith, and in Ephesians, the concept is linked to the eschatological recapitulation of all things. Moisés Silva
839815 E.A. Peck-McClain, “Agency in Paul and Implications for Adolescent Girls”, Religious Education 110:1 (2015), pp. 95–109.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00344087.2015.989099
(2001) notes that scholars often ignore the eschatology of Galatians because they focus on other issues such as the justification debate. Silva then shows how pervasive eschatology in the letter is by discussing several sections in the letter, pointing out that by ignoring or minimising the eschatology of the letter one distorts its message. Stanley P. Saunders
840816 L. Togarasei, “Rethinking Christian Identity: African Reflections from Pauline Writings”, Perichoresis 14:1 (2016), pp. 101–114.
https://doi.org/10.1515/perc-2016-0006
(2002) demonstrates how eschatological rhetoric had a formative function in the spirituality of Early Christianity, by reshaping their view of space and time and by “learning Christ”. In the case of Galatians, the relationship between apocalyptic eschatology and a spirituality of freedom is of particular note. J. Prescott Johnson
841817 L. Legrand, L’apôtre des nations? Paul et la stratégie missionnaire des églises apostoliques (Paris: Cerf, 2001).
(2002/2003) discusses the expression “ages of ages” found in 1:5 and Ephesians 3:21. According to Johnson, the expression should not be interpreted as indicating something static but rather as a refence to eternity as life and movement, the supreme experience of God. Yon-Gyong Kwon
842818 M.W. Payne, “‘Identity’ and Global Ethnic Violence: A Theological-Missiological Reflection”, Mission Studies 19:2 (2002), pp. 113–135.
(2004) rejects the notion that the eschatology of Galatians is dominated by realised eschatology and argues, instead, that Paul’s argument was set within a futuristic eschatology. He reminds the Galatians of the implications of their current actions for the future, the “not yet”. Douglas A. Campbell
843819 C. Lienemann-Perrin, “The Biblical Foundations for a Feminist and Participatory Theology of Mission”, International Review of Mission 93:368 (2004), pp. 17–34.
(2005) is of the opinion that 3:28 may be viewed as a compact articulation of the PPME model (Pneumatologically Participatory Martyrological Eschatology) which characterises Paul’s gospel. It also highlights important ethical actions sprouting forth from Paul’s gospel. Marinko Vidović
844820 E. Elengabeka, “Paul en mission: Fidélité à l’Esprit et confiance à l’institution”, Spiritus (Revue d’Expériences et de Recherches Missionnaires) 187 (2007), pp. 155–164.
(2005) draws attention to the fact that the incursion of the eschaton into history was normally linked in Paul’s time to Jesus’ death but that Paul linked it in 4:4 to Jesus’ birth. With Jesus’ birth (in which Mary also had her role to play) the end of history was thus already anticipated although history paradoxically still continued – a situation enabling believers to live optimistically, experiencing the new creation brought about by God. Andrew W. Pitts
845821 J.W. Maris, De Missie van een Moeder (Apeldoornse Studies 50, Apeldoorn: Theologische Universiteit, 2008).
(2008) notes that scholars tend to focus on developments or tensions in Paul’s eschatology and, instead, focuses on its unity. Pitts shows that, in spite of a rhetorical diversity in Paul’s letters, there is a constant eschatological framework underlying them. In a contribution on the unfolding of eschatology in Scripture, Keith A. Mathison
846822 J. Punt, “Come to Terms with the Radical Spiritual, Social and Even Cosmic Dimensions of Peace: Missional Perspectives in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians”, in: J. du Plessis, E. Orsmond and H. van Deventer (eds.), Missionary Perspectives in the New Testament (Wellington: Bible Media, 2009), pp. 185–204.
(2009) notes that eschatology does not dominate Galatians but that it underlies much of Paul’s argument, in particular the fact that he believed that the Mosaic covenant had come to an end when Jesus came. The Mosaic covenant thus only had to prepare for the new age inaugurated by his advent. In a study of Paul’s references to the kingdom, Réne A. López
847823 B.Y. Quarshie, “Paul and the Primal Substructure of Christianity: Missiological Reflections on the Epistle to the Galatians”, Journal of African Christian Thought 12:1 (2009), pp. 8–14.
(2011) also looks at the term “inheritance”, raising the question of whether the term only refers to the future or also to a present reality. In the case of 3:18, 29, 4:1, 7 and 30, López is of the opinion that it refers to the world to come. In a contribution on eschatology in Galatians and Romans, Christof Landmesser
848824 J.M. Prior, “Integration, Isolation or Deviation: Reading Galatians 3:27–28 in Indonesia Today”, Mission Studies 27:1 (2010), pp. 71–90.
https://doi.org/10.1163/157338310X497964
(2011) points out how Paul uses the final judgement of the end-time to make the gospel effective in the current situation. Richard Last
849825 J. Kok, “Mission and Ethics in Galatians”, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 67:1 (2011), pp. 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v67i1.896
(2011) raises the question as to what Paul thought the purpose of his mission was. After an investigation of several Pauline texts, amongst others from Galatians, Last concludes: “The apostle understood the purpose of his mission as preparing individuals for the eschaton— which meant getting individuals to believe in Christ and getting them involved in local Christ-believing communities before the parousia.”
850826 M. Knowles, “The Galatian Test: Is Islam an Abrahamic Religion?”, New Blackfriars 92 (2011), pp. 318–321.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-
D. Francois Tolmie
851
2005.2010.01403.x
(2011) notes that all three eras normally distinguished in the New Testament (the era before the coming of Christ, Christ’s coming and the end of time) are reflected in Galatians and that Christ’s coming receives the most attention. However, this does not mean that the future is unimportant to Paul, since the nature of the “fulness of time” (4:4) theologically implies that something still has to happen in the future, making believers long for the future and live in hope of what is still to come. According to Scott J. Hafemann
852827 R. Last, “What Purpose Did Paul Understand His Mission to Serve?”, Harvard Theological Review 104:3 (2011), pp. 299–324.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S001781601100023X
(2019), from Galatians 3 and 4, it is clear that Paul thought that the eschatological restoration dawned in Christ, thus ending the era of the Sinai covenant. However, the two covenants (of the flesh and of the Spirit respectively) would continue until the present evil age comes to an end. In a study of the flesh-Spirit antithesis in Romans and Galatians, Brian H. Thomas
853828 Op. cit., p. 324.
(2020) argues that the “overlap of ages” scheme generally accepted by Pauline scholars to explain this antithesis is not adequate. Thomas proposes a tripartite salvation-historical schema: SH-yesterday (time in the flesh), SH-now (time in the Spirit before the parousia) and SH-soon (time after Christ’s return).
18.2 Apocalypticism
J. Louis Martyn
854829 E. Mackenzie, “Mission and the Emerging Church: Pauline Reflections on a New Kind of Missiology”, Missiology: An International Review 40:3 (2012), pp. 315–328.
https://doi.org/10.1177/009182961204000307
(2000) offers an overview of Paul’s apocalyptic gospel in Galatians. According to Martyn, “Galatians is a clear witness to a basic conviction of Paul: the gospel is not about human movement into blessedness, but about God’s liberating invasion of the cosmos. Christ’s love enacted in the cross has the power to change the world because it is embodied in the new community of mutual service.”
855830 J. Punt, “Mission, Ethics, and Outsiders/Insiders in Galatians”, in: J. Kok, T. Nicklas, D.T. Roth and C.M. Hays (eds.), Sensitivity Towards Outsiders: Exploring the Dynamic Relationship between Mission and Ethics in the New Testament and Early Christianity (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.364, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), pp. 225–245.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157504-4
In a contribution on Paul’s use of Second Isaiah in Galatians, Martinus C. de Boer
856831 C.S. Han, “Missional Perspective in Galatians: A Sociological Approach”, 성경과 신학 73 (2015), pp. 141–168.
(2002) argues that there are clear indications that Paul knew Second Isaiah and that he used insights from it to formulate his own apocalyptic eschatology. De Boer discusses 1:15–16, 4:19, 21–5:1 and 6:15. In another contribution, De Boer
857832 P.J. Leithart, Delivered from the Elements of the World: Atonement, Justification, Mission (Grand Rapids MI: InterVarsity Press, 2016).
(2002) depicts Paul as a theologian of God’s apocalypse, arguing that he does not only use apocalyptic terms to refer to the end-times and Christ’s parousia but also when he speaks of the gospel that he preaches and the faith that it brings about. This implies that gospel and faith are also part of his apocalyptic eschatology. In a third contribution, De Boer
858833 A.E. Graff and E.L. Pauly, “A Estrutura Teológica Missionária Bidimensional de Lutero: Preleções Sobre Gênesis e Gálatas”, Caminhos 15:2 (2017), pp. 342–353.
https://doi.org/10.18224/cam.v15i2.5726
(2004) explains that Paul reflected on Isaiah 54:1 in the light of the crisis in Galatia and this prompted his allegorical interpretation of the story in Genesis, in that the two women who are contrasted in Isaiah 54:1 provided him with an apocalyptic antinomy which helped him to find other pairs in the Genesis story that he could interpret within a Christological and apocalyptic eschatology. Gys M.H. Loubser
859834 J. Kok and J.A. Dunne, “Participation in Christ and Missional Dynamics in Galatians”, in: A. Despotis (ed.), Participation, Justification, and Conversion: Eastern Orthodox Interpretation of Paul and the Debate between “Old and New Perspectives on Paul” (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.442, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), pp. 59–87.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-155453-7
(2005) points out that scholars quite often pass over Galatians as an important source for Paul’s conception of Christian freedom, since they regard it as a contingent letter. Loubser thus highlights the important ways in which Paul uses apocalyptic themes in the letter to get the idea across that a totally new era has arrived in Christ, characterised by liberty and by the activity of the Spirit that produces the spiritual fruit that the law cannot bring about. In a discussion of Paul’s maternity as reflected in 4:19, Beverly Roberts Gaventa
860835 P. Borgen, “Perspectives for Mission: Galatians 3:1–14 in Context”, in: D.E. Aune and R. Hvalvik (eds.), The Church and Its Mission in the New Testament and Early Christianity: Essays in Memory of Hans Kvalbein (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.404, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018), pp. 181–193. https://doi.org/
10.1628/978-3-16-155910-5
(2007) argues that this verse should not be regarded merely as an appeal supported by the friendship between Paul and the Galatians. Rather, it is a theological claim “that Paul’s work as an apostle occurs within an apocalyptic framework that is created by God’s revelation of Jesus Christ and that looks forward to the full incorporation of all believers – indeed, of the cosmos itself – into Christ”.
861836 M.L. Sweeney, “The Pauline Collection, Church Partnerships, and the Mission of the Church in the 21st Century”, Missiology 48:2 (2019), pp. 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091829619887387
Moisés Silva
862837 H. Ordon, “‘Kiedy Zaś Nadeszła Pełnia Czasu’ (Ga 4,4)”, Roczniki Teologiczne 48 (2001), pp. 105–119.
(2007) offers a detailed explanation of Paul’s use of Psalm 143:2 (142:2 LXX) in 2:16, pointing out that Paul was thinking of a broader concept of the law and that the quotation brings definite apocalyptic overtones to his argument. According to David I. Starling
863838 M. Gourgues, “La ‘plénitude des temps’, ou le temps marqué de façon décisive par la référence à Jésus Christ: Polysémie d’une formule néotestamentaire (Mc 1,15; Ga 4,4; Ep 1,10)”, Science et Esprit 53:1 (2001), pp. 93–110.
(2011), Paul’s use of Isaiah 54:1 in 4:27 is not explained sufficiently by the apocalyptic or Christological notions that he brings to the text or even the wider context of Isaiah. It should rather be understood in terms of a larger argument from Scripture that Paul uses in the letter. Teresa Kuo-Yu Tsui
864839 M. Silva, Interpreting Galatians: Explorations in Exegetical Method (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2001 [1996], 2nd edition), pp. 169–186.
(2012) is of the opinion that in 4:27 (and in Romans 6:3), Paul refers to baptism apocalyptically in the sense that it points forward to the final transformation, the resurrection, that is based on the apocalyptic Christ event. Jason Maston (2012)
865840 S.P. Saunders, “‘Learning Christ’: Eschatology and Spiritual Formation in New Testament Christianity”, Interpretation 56:2 (2002), pp. 155–167.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002096430005600204
disagrees with scholars who think that Paul’s apocalyptic theology in Galatians implies the absence of salvation history. Maston detects a notion of salvation history underlying 3:15–4:7, according to which the period of the law is portrayed as a period of “Unheil”. In his overview of the “rhetoric of difference” and the genealogy of heresy in Second Temple Judaism and Early Christianity, Robert M. Royalty Jr.
866841 J.P. Johnson, “The Age of the Ages”, The Asbury Theological Journal 57/58:2/1 (2002/2003), pp. 105–127.
(2013) also discusses Paul’s views. They were based on an apocalyptic dualism and Paul created his own version of the gospel which he defended in ideological discourses of power (as happened in Galatians). Joseph Hyung S. Lee
867842 Y.-G. Kwon, Eschatology in Galatians: Rethinking Paul’s Response to the Crisis in Galatia (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.183, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157091-9
(2013) describes Paul’s use of Scripture as “apocalyptic allegory” and explains his use of Genesis and Isaiah in terms of three perspectives: intertextuality, the use of a historical narrative and an apocalyptic perspective. Sigve K. Tonstad
868843 D.A. Campbell, The Quest for Paul’s Gospel: A Suggested Strategy (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplements 274, London/New York NY: T & T Clark International, 2005), pp. 95–111.
https://doi.org/10.5040/9780567661289
For a critical response, see: Joel Thomas Chopp, “Unearthing Paul’s Ethics: Douglas Campbell on Creation, Redemption, and the Christian Moral Life”, Journal of Theological Interpretation 11:2 (2017), pp. 259–276.
https://doi.org/10.5325/jtheointe.11.2.0259
(2013) believes that, whereas Paul’s opponents regarded Abraham as the primary proof of their message on circumcision, Paul’s interpretation of Abraham was based on apocalyptic notions and the Akedah. This is expressed primarily by the call “Abba! Father!” (4:6). Michael B. Cover
869844 M. Vidović, “‘Punina Vremena’ (Gal 4,4) – Iskaz Prisutnosti Eshatona u Povijesti (I)”, Crkva u Svijetu 40:1 (2005), pp. 7–28, and M. Vidović, “‘Punina Vremena’ (Gal 4,4) – Iskaz Prisutnosti Eshatona u Povijesti (II)”, Crkva u Svijetu 40:2 (2005), pp. 143–160.
(2014) reads 4:21–5:1 in the light of Philo’s practice of allegory, as well as similar Jewish traditions reflected in the Letter to the Hebrews. Cover highlights Platonising and apocalyptic polarities in Paul’s eschatology, showing that Paul’s allegoresis is similar to what is found in Philo’s Pentateuchal commentaries. Richard B. Hays
870845 A.W. Pitts, “Unity and Diversity in Pauline Eschatology”, in: S.E. Porter (ed.), Paul: Jew, Greek, and Roman (Pauline Studies 5, Leiden/Boston MA: Brill, 2008), pp. 65–91.
https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004171596.i-370.37
(2014) identifies 18 apocalyptic themes and images in Galatians and discusses three dominant motifs in this regard: paternity (that God adopted Gentiles so that they could become part of the covenant people), passion (that Jesus’ death saved people) and participation (that believers are united with Christ). Hays also discusses the theological implications of these notions and what they tell us about the pastoral nature of Paul’s theology. Gys M.H. Loubser
871846 K.A. Mathison, From Age to Age: The Unfolding of Biblical Eschatology (Phillipsburg NJ: P & R Publishing, 2009), pp. 493–530.
(2014) stresses the importance of apocalyptic in Galatians. Paul uses it to convey the drastic soteriological and ethical changes occasioned by the coming of Christ and the Spirit. Thereby he wishes to reframe the way the Galatians think, an insight that should help believers currently to understand their times as an era that is post-law. Todd D. Still
872847 R.A. López, “A Study of Pauline Passages on Inheriting the Kingdom”, Bibliotheca Sacra 168:672 (2011), pp. 443–459.
(2014) combines a narratival and an apocalyptic reading of Galatians by means of Greimas’s narratival model. Still distinguishes between three sequences: the initial sequence (before faith came), the topical sequence (the time of the gospel, Paul’s time in and away from Galatia, and his encouraging of the Galatians to recall what happened earlier in their spiritual lives) and the final sequence (time beyond time). John Anthony Dunne
873848 C. Landmesser, “Eschatologie im Galaterbrief und im Römerbrief”, in: H.-J. Eckstein, C. Landmesser, H. Lichtenberger, J. Adam and M. Bauspiess (eds.), Eschatologie – Eschatology: The Sixth Durham-Tübingen Research Symposium: Eschatology in Old Testament, Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (Tübingen, September, 2009) (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.272, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), pp. 229–248.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151561-3
(2015) disagrees with the apocalyptic interpretation of Paul by Martyn and De Boer. Dunne’s primary argument is that such an apocalyptic reading does not bear a resemblance to what happens in Jewish apocalyptic literature. Dunne does not find the motives of discontinuity, duality and dichotomy that they emphasise in Jewish apocalyptic literature, neither in Galatians. Taking J. Louis Martyn’s
874849 R. Last, “What Purpose Did Paul Understand His Mission to Serve?”, Harvard Theological Review 104:3 (2011), pp. 299–324.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S001781601100023X
question “What time is it?” as cue, Chad Chambers
875850 Op. cit., p. 324.
(2015) investigates the presentation of time in 1:11–2:21. Chambers argues that Paul structures time metaphorically and that he thinks of time as multidirectional as well as multidimensional: “[T]ime is multidimensional, consisting of multiple pasts, presents, and futures with each linked to the revelatory nature of Christ’s coming into the world. God’s revelation of Christ is an event that happens within history but changes time.”
876851 D.F. Tolmie, “Living in Hope ‘in the Fullness of Time’: The Eschatology of Galatians”, in: J.G. van der Watt (ed.), Eschatology of the New Testament and Some Related Documents (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.315, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), pp. 239–255.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151814-0
Jan Lambrecht
877852 S.J. Hafemann, Paul: Servant of the New Covenant: Pauline Polarities in Eschatological Perspective (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.435, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019), pp. 52–89.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157702-4
Updated version of: S.J. Hafemann, “Paul and the Exile of Israel in Galatians 3–4”, in: J.M. Scott (ed.), Exile: Old Testament, Jewish and Christian Conceptions (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 56, Leiden: Brill, 1997), pp. 329‑371.
(2017) disagrees with Chambers and prefers to describe Paul’s view of time not by means of opposing time metaphors (as Chambers does) but by focusing on the fact that God caused discontinuity in the continuity by means of a breakthrough in history. According to Michael J. Gorman
878853 B.H. Thomas, Living in the Flesh by the Spirit: The Pauline View of Flesh and Spirit in Galatians (Eugene OR: Wipf & Stock, 2020).
(2016), Paul was both an apocalyptic and a new-covenant theologian and reworked his theology of the covenant in the light of his experience of Christ as the Messiah and the Spirit, in particular the fact that indwelling of the Spirit and the law took on a cruciform mode. The revelation to and in Paul can thus not be separated. Michael F. Bird
879854 J.L. Martyn, “The Apocalyptic Gospel in Galatians”, Interpretation 54:3 (2000), pp. 246–266.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002096430005400303
(2016) disagrees with Martyn’s apocalyptic interpretation of Galatians. Bird does not believe that it is necessary to make a distinction between apocalyptic and salvation history. As Bird puts it: “The invasive action of God declared in the gospel still stands within a promise-fulfilment scheme that Paul frequently utilises in his theological discourse. There is no requirement that we divorce Paul’s apocalyptic theology from its metanarrative in the Jewish Scriptures.”
880855 Op. cit., p. 246.J.P. Davies
881856 M.C. de Boer, “Second Isaiah and Paul’s Eschatology in the Letter to the Galatians”, in: F. Postma, K. Spronk and E. Talstra (eds.), The New Things: Eschatology in Old Testament Prophecy: Festschrift for Henk Leene (Amsterdamse Cahiers voor Exegese van de Bijbel en zijn Tradisies Supplement Series 3, Maastricht: Shaker Publishing, 2002), pp. 35–43.
(2016) offers a comparison of 4 Ezra and Galatians, emphasising the themes of the two ages and salvation history. Davies points out that in some interpretations of Galatians there is sometimes “a false antithesis between the ‘punctiliar’ and the ‘linear’, between the two ages and redemptive history, that does not do justice to the way in which multiple eschatological metaphors interrelate in the apocalypses”.
882857 M.C. de Boer, “Paul, Theologian of God’s Apocalypse”, Interpretation 56:1 (2002), pp. 21–33.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002096430005600103
To absolutise the two-ages scheme and apply it to Galatians univocally thus ignores the complex way in which Paul uses eschatological metaphors. In another contribution, Davies
883
Paul, Theologian of God’s Apocalypse: Essays on Paul and Apocalyptic (Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2020), pp. 39–54. Also available in: M.C. de Boer,
(2016) offers a detailed evaluation of the “apocalyptic Paul” as interpreted in some Pauline circles by examining such claims in the light of 1 Enoch, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch and Revelation. Davies confirms that Paul may indeed be regarded as an apocalyptic thinker but raises critical questions about the ways in which this is handled in recent approaches. Douglas Harink
884858 M.C. de Boer, “Paul’s Quotation of Isaiah 54.1 in Galatians 4.27”, New Testament Studies 50:3 (2004), pp. 370–389.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688504000219
(2017) develops Louis Martyn’s apocalyptic perspective on Paul further by highlighting trinitarian and Christological aspects in 4:1–11. Harink identifies two aspects of apocalyptic discontinuity: the difference between divine being and creaturehood, and the messianic liberation of a spiritually enslaved world by Christ. Harink further argues that for Paul apocalyptic was essentially a peaceful union of divine and human realities in the incarnation of Christ. James M. Scott
885859 G.M.H. Loubser, “Paul’s Ethic of Freedom: No Flash in the Galatian Pan”, Neotestamentica 39:2 (2005), pp. 313–337.
(2017) sets out to answer the question of whether it makes sense to interpret Galatians from an apocalyptic perspective by comparing it with an apocalyptic text, the Epistle of Enoch (1 Enoch 92–105). Scott picks up enough similarities between the two writings in terms of form and content to claim that the two writings are analogous. Logan Williams
886860 B.R. Gaventa, Our Mother Saint Paul (Louisville KY/London: Westminster John Knox, 2007), pp. 29–39. Earlier versions: B.R. Gaventa, “Our Mother St Paul: Toward the Recovery of a Neglected Theme”, in: A.-J. Levine and M. Blickenstaff (eds.), A Feminist Companion to Paul (Cleveland OH: Pilgrim Press, 2004), pp. 85–97, and B.R. Gaventa, “Our Mother St Paul: Toward the Recovery of a Neglected Theme”, The Princeton Seminary Bulletin 17:1 (1996), pp. 29–44.
(2018) compares the Apocalypse of the Weeks in 1 Enoch with Galatians in order to determine whether the motif of creation e contrario that plays such an important role in Galatians is apocalyptic. Williams finds that this motif is absent from the Apocalypse of the Weeks, which means that one cannot classify this motif in Galatians as apocalyptic. Williams prefers to refer to it as “christomorphic”. Kang-Yup Na
887861 Op. cit., p. 37.
(2019) offers a multidimensional reading of Galatians on the theme of borders in the light of a Korean world view (in particular in terms of the concept of dao). According to Na, “Seen through a dao lens, Paul’s use of κτίσις and his allusions to creation signal the ultimate border crossing, from this age into the apocalyptic age to come, from separation and alienation to the primordial dynamics of undifferentiated reality”.
888862 M. Silva, “Galatians”, in: G. Beale and D. Carson (eds.), Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids MI: Baker
18.3 New creation (6:15)
According to Moyer V. Hubbard
889
Academic, 2007), pp. 785–810.
(2002), the expression “new creation” is used in 6:15 in an anthropological sense, with the emphasis on God’s creative work in the individual, which makes one’s outer state irrelevant. Douglas J. Moo
890863 D.I. Starling, Not My People: Gentiles as Exiles in Pauline Hermeneutics (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 184, Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011), pp. 23–60.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110259612
(2010) interprets the expression in 6:15 and in 2 Corinthians 5:17 as referring to the new situation brought about by Christ’s coming – a situation that will be consummated at his return. This will involve a total, cosmic renewal. Rodrigo J. Morales
891864 T.K.-Y. Tsui, “‘Baptized into His Death’ (Rom 6,3) and ‘Clothed with Christ’ (Gal 3,27): The Soteriological Meaning of Baptism in Light of Pauline Apocalyptic”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 88:4 (2012), pp. 395–417.
https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.88.4.2957935
(2010) discusses the importance of the themes of the new exodus, new creation and the restoration of Israel in Galatians. According to Morales, Paul regarded the gift of the Spirit as a fulfilment of God’s promise to restore Israel. Furthermore, Paul followed Deutero-Isaiah by linking the Spirit to the blessing of Abraham and the inclusion of the Gentiles. T. Ryan Jackson
892865 J. Maston, “The Nature of Salvation History in Galatians”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 2:2 (2012), pp. 89–103.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26426549
(2010) thinks that the Galatians would have understood the expression “new creation” in a cosmological sense and would not have restricted it to private individual experiences. Grant Macaskill
893866 R.M. Royalty Jr., The Origin of Heresy: A History of Discourse in Second Temple Judaism and Early Christianity (Routledge Studies in Religion 18, London/New York NY: Routledge, 2013), pp. 64–88.
(2013) interprets the expression as an indication that Paul regarded the church as the new eschatological temple (with Isaiah as background) in which God restores cosmic order, thereby fulfilling the expectations that Isaiah had about Zion. In a study of “new creation” in Galatians, 2 Corinthians and Ephesians, Mark D. Owens
894867 J.H.S. Lee, “Apocalyptic Allegory: Paul’s Use of Genesis and Isaiah in Galatians 4:19–5:1”, in: H.C. Kim (ed.), Galatians as Examined by Diverse Academics in 2012 (St. Andrews, Scotland) (Hermit Kingdom Studies in Christianity and Judaism 3, Newark NJ/Seoul: The Hermit Kingdom Press, 2013), pp. 42–56.
(2015) argues that it was based on an intertextual reading of the Hebrew Scriptures and that Paul used it to summarise the redemptive significance of Christ’s death and resurrection. It has anthropological, cosmological and ecclesiological dimensions and should be understood in terms of a primeval-end time (“Urzeit-Endzeit”) typology. On the basis of 6:11–16, 2 Corinthians 5:17 and Romans 8:18–22, Luis Espíndola García
895868 S.K. Tonstad, “Inscribing Abraham: Apocalyptic, the Akedah, and ‘Abba! Father’ in Galatians”, in: H.C. Kim (ed.), Galatians as Examined by Diverse Academics in 2012 (St. Andrews, Scotland) (Hermit Kingdom Studies in Christianity and Judaism 3, Newark NJ/Seoul: The Hermit Kingdom Press, 2013), pp. 15–28.
(2016) links the expression to God’s power to create and re-create. Paul thus used it to refer to the fact that every time a human being receives the gift of salvation from God, a new being is created. Scott J. Hafemann
896869 M.B. Cover, “‘Now and Above; Then and Now’ (Gal. 4:21–31): Platonizing and Apocalyptic Polarities in Paul’s Eschatology”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 220–229.
(2019) draws attention to the close relationship between “new creation” and the notion of the consummation of the covenant in 6:15 and 2 Corinthians 5:17. Hafemann believes that the expression “new creation” summarises Paul’s eschatological soteriology and that his thoughts on “new creation” are closely linked to his views on the “new covenant”. “New creation” is thus inextricably linked to the history of Israel and the move from the old covenant to the new covenant.ConclusionFrom this survey, it has become clear that research on the Letter to the Galatians is flourishing. Although it is true that much of what has been published is not new and that well-known arguments and insights have often been repeated, it is also clear that much progress has been made. To my mind, significant advances have been made in three areas, without which our knowledge of Galatians would have been the poorer. First, there has been a substantial increase in the sources made available to scholars. In this regard, I refer in particular to the studies and new translations of interpretations of the letter noted in Chapter 3 on the Wirkungsgeschichte of the letter. All of these will be valuable resources for adding depth to future attempts at interpreting the letter. Secondly, the broadening of the variety of interpretative approaches applied to the letter should be applauded. In particular, the growth in non-traditional readings of the letter should be viewed as a positive development. This may also serve as an indication that there is still more to come as far as this aspect is concerned. Thirdly, in several instances, small but significant advances have been made in terms of detailed exegetical issues or, in a broader sense, in terms of the way in which theological issues in the letter may be interpreted. In our continuing endeavour to arrive at a better understanding of this letter, this should serve as encouragement to keep on testing new avenues and to investigate as many new angles as possible.In the first chapter, studies focusing on introductory issues were discussed. Of all the issues discussed in this chapter, authorship received the least attention, with only sporadic suggestions that Paul did not write the letter. With regard to the occasion of the letter, the North- and South-Galatian debate continued unabatedly with no possibility of a consensus being reached. Furthermore, in this chapter, a representative example of studies done outside our discipline regarding the recipients was also offered. Such studies addressed a wide variety of themes, such as overviews of the settlement of the Galatians in Asia Minor, their language, diet, cities, customs and important persons and events. Research such as this is mostly ignored by Galatians scholars and it might be worthwhile for us to take note of what is happening in this discipline in the Humanities. Regarding the identity of Paul’s opponents, most scholars still preferred to describe them as either Jewish Christians or Jews, but a small number of differing options were also raised. In the first chapter, it also became clear that the aspect that received the most attention from scholars was historical issues underlying Galatians and/or its relationship to Acts. Of these, what exactly happened at the Jerusalem conference and at the Antioch incident, and how one should understand the events, drew the most interest from scholars. In this chapter, an overview of research on possible backgrounds for understanding Galatians was also given. The variety was astounding: 1 Enoch, 4 Ezra, Maccabees, Psalms of Solomon, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the LXX, Philo, Judaism (in a broader sense), the Targums and Rabbinic literature, philosophy (Stoicism and other philosophical movements) and the ancient world (in a broader sense).In the second chapter, a variety of aspects was discussed: text-critical, linguistic, stylistic and translation issues. In the case of textual criticism, most of the publications focused on textual issues in particular verses or pericopes in the letter. The impact of several new approaches on the practice of textual criticism was also illustrated. Amongst these were cladistics, systemic functional linguistics and reasoned eclecticism. Furthermore, several scholars focused on versions of the texts used by scholars who had not received much attention before, such as ArabGr1, Old Latin witnesses to Galatians, the Gothic version and Origen’s and Jerome’s texts of the letter. P46 also drew a good deal of interest. Under the heading “linguistic issues”, a broad variety of studies was noted in which careful and in some instances highly technical investigations of the letter or parts of it were offered. Stylistic issues drew the most attention, with Paul’s use of metaphor in the letter being the favourite of scholars. The metaphor that received the most attention was Paul’s depiction of the law as a pedagogue (in 3:24–25), followed by slavery and kinship metaphors. In the final section in this chapter, contributions on the translation of Galatians or parts of it were discussed. Several new translations of the letter or the Pauline letters were published, as well as an English translation of the Syriac Peshitta of the letters from Galatians to Philemon. The other studies in this section all focused on translation problems in Galatians or part of it.The third chapter was devoted to the Wirkungsgeschichte of the letter. From the overview, it is evident that this is a growing field in Galatians research, since the number of studies published per year has constantly increased. The themes that scholars are interested in, are quite diverse. The person that attracted the most attention was Martin Luther (by far!), followed by Jerome, Chrysostom, Augustine, Aquinas and, perhaps surprisingly, Martin Heidegger. One of the major developments in the period under review was the astounding number of primary sources that were made accessible in other languages. English translations of commentaries on Galatians by the following people appeared: Marius Victorinus, Ambrosiaster, Jerome, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Augustine, Sedelius Scottus, Thomas Aquinas, Nicholas of Lyra, Heinrich Bullinger, Jeanne Guyon, Emil Fuchs, and Sylvain Maréchal. Heidegger’s interpretation of Galatians was translated into English. Chrysostom’s homilies on the letter were translated into French and Luther’s commentary on the letter was translated into English. Critical texts of Erasmus’s annotations on the letter and of Heinrich Bullinger’s commentary appeared. Several studies containing translated extracts also appeared, thus making it easy to get an idea of how certain groups of commentators interpreted the letter: The Ancient Christian Commentary Series, the Reformation Commentary on Scripture and the Reformation Heritage Bible Commentary. The comprehensive volume on Galatians in the Novum Testamentum Patristicum and the publication by Ian Christopher Levy on six medieval commentaries also definitely should be mentioned. In the fourth chapter, research on the interpretative approaches that scholars use when they interpret Galatians was summarised. The huge diversity in approaches that are followed was truly amazing. The following approaches were discussed: A focus on the way in which Paul uses the Hebrew Scriptures, social-scientific/sociological approaches, epistolographical approaches, rhetorical approaches, narrative approaches, semiotic approaches, studies focusing on intertextuality, recipient-orientated approaches, psychological approaches, ideology-critical approaches (liberational, feminist, gender-critical and post-colonial readings), literary analysis, philosophical approaches, logical analysis, register analysis, speech act theory, cognitive science approaches, memory studies and theories on embodiment and ritual. It also became clear that the issue that received the most interest (by far!) was the way in which Paul interpreted and used the Hebrew Scriptures. More than 140 studies from this perspective were published during the period that we considered. Next in line were three other approaches: rhetorical analysis was used in more than 70 studies, social-scientific approaches in more than 60 studies and ideology-critical approaches in more than 40 studies.In the final chapter, an overview of research on the theology of the letter was presented. The three themes that received the most attention from scholars were Paul’s view of the law, soteriology and ethics. In the case of Paul’s view of the law, several aspects received attention. Most of the studies that were published were of a more general nature, but several other issues were also of interest to scholars: the expressions “works of the law”, “under the law” and “the law of Christ”, as well as the depiction of the law as a pedagogue in 3:23–24. The Wirkungsgeschichte of Paul’s view of the law in Galatians was a theme that constantly attracted the attention of scholars. In the case of the soteriology of the letter, most of the studies focused on the soteriology of the letter in a broader sense. Apart from this, the New Perspective on Paul, the expression “faith of Christ”, the possibility of salvation history in Galatians and the Wirkungsgeschichte of the soteriology of the letter also kept scholars occupied. However, interest in the New Perspective on Paul seems to be on the decline (perhaps there is not really anything new to say from this perspective?) and the possibility of salvation history in the letter seems to appeal to only a small group of scholars. The “faith of Christ” debate continues unabatedly, with no consensus in sight. From the overview in this chapter, it is also clear that John Barclay’s Paul and the Gift generated a remarkable amount of attention and was perceived by many scholars as an important new perspective for understanding Paul’s soteriology in the letter (and in the other Pauline letters). The ethics of the letter was approached from a large variety of angles: the first century CE background, the function of paraenesis, the relationship between ethics and mission, the indicative-imperative debate, the flesh-Spirit contrast, the relationship between faith and the Spirit, suffering, human identity and agency and aesthetics. Some studies focused on important terms/concepts in the ethics of Galatians: grace, spiritual slavery, freedom, love, obedience, sanctification, mimesis, justification, violence, conflict, the law and poverty. A great number of studies focusing on particular verses or pericopes also appeared. The Wirkungsgeschichte of the ethics of the letter received much attention, with most of the studies focusing on the way in which the text has been interpreted or should be interpreted in the current context. In many instances, such studies focused on the appropriation of 3:28 in our context, with great emphasis on the notion of equality and the possibility of ordination women in church offices.870 R.B. Hays, “Apocalyptic poiēsis in Galatians: Paternity, Passion, and Participation ”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel, and Ethics in Paul’s Letter (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 200–219. Also available in: R.B. Hays, Reading with the Grain of Scripture: Resurrection, Canon, Community (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2020), pp. 182–203. 871 G.M.H. Loubser, “About Galatians, Apocalyptic and the Switching of Paradigms”, Acta Theologica Supplementum 19 (2014), pp. 164–185.
https://doi.org/10.4314/actat.v33i2S.9
872 T.D. Still, “‘In the Fullness of Time’ (Gal. 4:4): Chronology and Theology in Galatians ”, in: M.W. Elliott, S.J. Hafemann, N.T. Wright and J. Frederick (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology: Justification, the Gospel,
(Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2014), pp. 239–248. and Ethics in Paul’s Letter
873 J.A. Dunne, “Suffering and Covenantal Hope in Galatians: A Critique of the ‘Apocalyptic Reading’ and Its Proponents”, Scottish Journal of Theology 68:1 (2015), pp. 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0036930614000866
874 J.L. Martyn, Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (Anchor Bible 33A, New York NY/London/Toronto/Sydney/Auckland: Doubleday, 1997), p. 23. 875 C. Chambers, “‘Before I Was Born’: Time in Paul’s Autobiographical Reflections in Galatians 1 and 2”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 5:2 (2015), pp. 257–269.
https://doi.org/10.2307/jstudpaullett.5.2.0257
876 Op. cit., p. 268.877 J. Lambrecht, In Search of Meaning: Collected Notes on the New Testament (2014–2017) (Balti: Scholars’ Press, 2017), pp. 434–438. 878 M.J. Gorman, “The Apocalyptic New Covenant and the Shape of Life in the Spirit According to Galatians”, in: B.C. Blackwell, J.K. Goodrich and J. Maston (eds.), Paul and the Apocalyptic Imagination (Minneapolis MN:
Fortress, 2016), pp. 317–338. Also available in: M.J. Gorman, Participating in Christ: Explorations in Paul’s Theology and Spirituality (Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic, 2019), pp. 96–114.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt19qgfj6.20
879 M.F. Bird, An Anomalous Jew: Paul among Jews, Greeks, and Romans (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2016), pp. 108–169. 880 Op. cit., p. 116.881 J.P. Davies, “The Two Ages and Salvation History in Paul’s Apocalyptic Imagination: A Comparison of 4 Ezra and Galatians”, in: B.C. Blackwell, J.K. Goodrich and J. Maston (eds.), Paul and the Apocalyptic Imagination (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2016), pp. 339–359. 882 Op. cit., p. 357.883 J.P. Davies, Paul among the Apocalypses? An Evaluation of the “Apocalyptic Paul” in the Context of Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic Literature (Library of New Testament Studies 562, London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2016). 884 D. Harink, “J.L. Martyn and Apocalyptic Discontinuity: The Trinitarian, Christological Ground of Galatians in Galatians 4:1–11”, Journal for
7:1/2 (2017), pp. 101–111. the Study of Paul and His Letters
https://doi.org/10.5325/jstudpaullett.7.1-2.0101
885 J.M. Scott, “A Comparison of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians with the Epistle of Enoch”, in: B.E. Reynolds and L.T. Stuckenbruck (eds.), The Jewish Apocalyptic Tradition and the Shaping of New Testament Thought (Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2017), pp. 193–218.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1kgqv21.14
886 L. Williams, “Disjunction in Paul: Apocalyptic or Christomorphic? Comparing the Apocalypse of Weeks with Galatians”, New Testament Studies 64:1 (2018), pp. 64–80.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0028688517000170
887 K.-Y. Na, “Of Great Walls, DMZs, and Other Lines in the Sand: The Truth (of the Gospel) About Borders and Barriers – and Crossing Them in Galatians”, in: J. Ahn (ed.), Landscapes of Korean and Korean American Biblical Interpretation (International Voices in Biblical Studies 10, Atlanta GA: SBL Press, 2019), pp. 217–240. 888 Op. cit., p. 240.889 M.V. Hubbard, New Creation in Paul’s Letters and Thought (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 119, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 131–232. 890 D.J. Moo, “Creation and New Creation”, Bulletin for Biblical Research 20:1 (2010), pp. 39–60.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26423963
891 R.J. Morales, The Spirit and the Restoration of Israel: New Exodus and New Creation Motifs in Galatians (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.282, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010).
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151625-2
892 T.R. Jackson, New Creation in Paul’s Letters: A Study of the Historical and Social Setting (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.272, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), pp. 84–114.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151615-3
893 G. Macaskill, Union with Christ in the New Testament (New York NY/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 225–227.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684298.001.0001
894 M.D. Owens, As It Was in the Beginning: An Intertextual Analysis of New Creation in Galatians, 2 Corinthians and Ephesians (Eugene OR: Pickwick Publications, 2015). 895 L. Espíndola García, “La Nueva Creación en el Pensamiento de Pablo”, Veritas 35 (2016), pp. 217–233.
https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-92732016000200010
896 S.J. Hafemann, Paul: Servant of the New Covenant: Pauline Polarities in Eschatological Perspective (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1.435, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019), pp. 300–343.
https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157702-4