Destination of the Galatians Letter

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=50 BGCOLOR="#333366" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <B>Destination of the Galatians Letter</B></div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=165 BGCOLOR="#CCCC99" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <B> <TABLE BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="2" CELLSPACING="1" WIDTH="132" BORDERCOLORLIGHT="#C0C0C0" BORDERCOLORDARK="#808080" FRAME="VOID" RULES="NONE" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" > <tR> <tD VALIGN=TOP HEIGHT= 35 ><NOBR><div> <A HREF="id340.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Head Coverings in 1 Corinthians 11"><U><B><IMG SRC="007151d0.gif" border=0 width="21" height="29" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></B></U></A></div> </NOBR></tD> <tD VALIGN=TOP><NOBR><div> <A HREF="id167.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Hebrews 6:18"><U><B><IMG SRC="008151d0.gif" border=0 width="21" height="29" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></B></U></A></div> </NOBR></tD> <tD VALIGN=TOP WIDTH="20"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="35" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="20" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></tD> <tD VALIGN=TOP><NOBR><div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="29" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" WIDTH="13"></div> </NOBR></tD> <tD VALIGN=TOP><NOBR><div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="29" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" WIDTH="27"></div> </NOBR></tD> </tR> </TABLE></B></div> <div> Previous/Next Article</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="www.stanbaker.org"><U><B>Home</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id2.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Biblical and Theological Studies"><U>Biblical and Theological Studies</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id3.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Church Ministry"><U><B>Church Ministry</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id15.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Sermon Notes"><U><B>Sermon Notes</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id4.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Links"><U><B>Links</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id5.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Personal"><U><B>Personal</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> www.stanbaker.org</div> <div> <A HREF="mailto:stan@stanbaker.org" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:stan@stanbaker.org"><U>stan@stanbaker.org</U></A></div> </td> <td valign="top" height=430 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <B>The Destination of the Letter to Galatians</B></div> <bR> <div> INTRODUCTION</div> <bR> <div> In the study of the Scriptures, it is necessary, as much as possible, to set the writings in their various contexts, in order to more precisely understand the writings. Regarding the letter of Paul to Galatia, Paul does not explicitly address his letter to either north or south Galatia. Instead, the destination is ambiguous. This paper will examine the major theories which are most determinative for deciding on the more likely destination of the letter to the Galatians.</div> <bR> <div> A brief history of the Galatians </div> <div> The Gauls settled in Asia Minor in the third century B.C. After being defeated by Attalus I, the king of Pergamum around 230 B.C., their kingdom was reduced to a small area in northern Asia. The kingdom was subjected to Roman control in 189 B.C. In 25 B.C., at the death in battle of Amyntas, the leader of Galatia-proper, as well as of a much larger territory, Galatia was reorganized by Rome into a province. The province of Galatia now encompassed a much larger territory than just their small region in the north. Such notable cities as Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch were a part of this Roman province.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (1)</U></FONT> These are cities that Paul visited on his first missionary journey, recorded in Acts 13-14.</div> <bR> <div> The destination of the letter to Galatia </div> <div> Herein lies the problem in determining the destination of the letter of Paul to the Galatians. Was Paul writing to the original, ethnic Galatians in their own geographic territory in the North, or was he writing to churches of the relatively recent Roman province, particularly those in the south which Acts records that Paul himself had established? Since it is unlikely that Paul was writing to every church in the Roman province, including ethnic Galatia, because he is addressing a specific problem and situation, a determination should be sought regarding whether Paul's letter was to north, ethnic Galatia or south, provincial Galatia. Which is the more likely destination?</div> <bR> <div> The north Galatia theory </div> <div> The north Galatian Theory suggests that Paul's letter to the Galatians was written to geographic and ethnic Galatia, that is, north Galatia. These were the true ethnic Galatians, living in their own relatively small homeland in northern Asia. This view was the popular view throughout most of church history. Several of the arguments are these:</div> <div> Church tradition </div> <div> The first and main argument for the case of north Galatia is the fact that throughout church history, students of the Bible have understood the destination to be north Galatia. This understanding began with the church fathers, and has persisted until the eighteenth century.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (2)</U></FONT> While Galatia had been a very large Roman province during NT times, by the end of the third century, Galatia had returned to the smaller area of north Galatia.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (3)</U></FONT> Betz seems to give this traditional view the priority without defense, instead suggesting that south Galatian theorists have the burden of proof. He says, "The arguments in favor of the 'province hypothesis,' however, depend upon another hypothesis, the historical reliability of the itineraries in Acts, and upon the argument from silence."<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (4)</U></FONT> He recognizes the speculative nature of both views, but states that it is "more probable" that Paul wrote to the North Galatians.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (5)</U></FONT></div> <bR> <div> The ethnicity of the Galatians </div> <div> J. B. Lightfoot suggests that the term "Galatia" as Paul uses it in the letter is used specifically for the ethnic region, not the province.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (6)</U></FONT> Regarding both Paul's and Luke's use, he writes, "Mysia, Phrygia, Pisidia, are all 'geographical expressions' destitute of any political significance; and as they occur in the same parts of the narrative with Galatia [Acts 14.24, 16.6-8, 18.23], it seems fair to infer that the latter is similarly used."<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (7)</U></FONT> Thus he suggests that the common way of referring to these regions was not by political entity, but by geographic and ethnic entity. So Galatia for Paul would refer to the geographical place, not the provincial entity. However, Lightfoot only cites Luke as evidence for this.</div> <bR> <div> The "fickle" character of the ethnic Galatians </div> <div> Lightfoot notes the generally "fickle" character of the ethnic Galatians, and relates that to Paul's characterization of them in his letter to them.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (8)</U></FONT> Paul describes them as quickly abandoning the truth of the pure gospel which he brought them (Gal 1.6), and to Lightfoot this is in line with his understanding that the Galatians are the ethnic, not political group. However, this characterization could apply to many different ethnic groups; it is not limited to north Galatians.</div> <bR> <div> Acts 16 and 18 suggest the possibility that Paul evangelized north Galatia </div> <div> Proponents of the north Galatia theory suggest that Acts 16.6 and 18.23 refer to visits by Paul to the north Galatian region. Lightfoot notes that the references to Phrygia and Galatia refer to one region, but that this region was north Galatia, first settled by Phrygians and latter occupied by the Gauls.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (9)</U></FONT> Thus it can be said that Acts records the evangelization of north Galatia, and this helps to confirm that Paul is writing his letter to them. Lightfoot points out that Acts 16 and 18 each refer to separate visits to the north Galatian region, so that Paul visited the area twice, visits separated by about three years.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (10)</U></FONT> On the second visit, Paul strengthened the churches that were there (Acts 18.23). However, it is more likely that the "Galatian and Phrygian region" as it is mentioned in these passages refer to the southern part of the province (this will be discussed later).</div> <bR> <div> The presence of Jews in north Galatia, not only south Galatia </div> <div> Betz understands part of the foundation of the <I>south</I> Galatia theory to be that there must have been Jews in the church which Paul wrote to, and since there was a large population of Jews in provincial south Galatia, and none that we know of in north Galatia, then Paul must have been writing to south Galatia. Tenney notes that "the presence of Judaizing agitators in the northern cities is less probable than their presence in the southern cities."<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (11)</U></FONT> Betz characterizes this as an inconclusive argument, but he also notes that recent discoveries have found Jewish inscriptions in the heart of north Galatia, thereby invalidating an alleged argument <I>against</I> the north Galatia theory.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (12)</U></FONT> While Paul in Galatians may recognize a strong Jewish influence in the churches of Galatia, this does not of necessity suggest either North or South Galatia, because Jews were in both areas.</div> <bR> <div> The south Galatia theory </div> <div> The south Galatia theory of the destination of the letter of Paul to the Galatians suggests that Paul was writing to churches in the southern part of the province of Galatia, particularly to churches he had established on his first missionary journey (Acts 13-14), in such cities as Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch. Some of the major arguments are:</div> <bR> <div> Paul usually used the political, provincial terms for places </div> <div> While evidence cited by Lightfoot confirms that Luke usually used geographic, ethnic terms for regions, evidence also suggests that Paul primarily used provincial terms when he was referring to various places.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (13)</U></FONT> While regarding the possibility of exceptions (such as 1 Thess 2.14, "Judea"), it seems to be a general rule that this was the way Paul used language. For example, in 1 Corinthians 16, Paul speaks of the churches of Galatia, as well as of Macedonia, Achaia, and Asia. Because here he cites Galatia along with provincial designations of the other three regions, it can be inferred that he is speaking of Galatia in the provincial sense.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (14)</U></FONT> If he understands it to be this way in 1 Corinthians 16, it is probable that he regularly understands "Galatia" to be the political entity, not merely the ethnic, geographic place. Ramsay discovered that as early as the second century B. C., "the whole state was thought of as Galatia and its people Galatians,"<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (15)</U></FONT> so Paul was using the common term "Galatians" to refer to the various peoples of the Roman province of Galatia.</div> <bR> <div> Acts reveals that Paul visited and evangelized the southern cities of the province of Galatia </div> <div> George cites this as the "great advantage" to the South Galatia theory, that we have a somewhat detailed record of Paul's evangelistic work among the people to whom Galatians is addressed.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (16)</U></FONT> On his first missionary journey, recorded in Acts 13-14, Paul evangelized the cities of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch. All of these are a part of what at that time was known as Galatia in the Roman provincial sense.</div> <bR> <div> "Galatians" was the best term to encompass the churches in the regions he was writing to </div> <div> If Paul indeed was writing to the congregations of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch, Burton points out that Galatians was the single best term by which to address them.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (17)</U></FONT> They were Galatians in the political, provincial sense, though not ethnically. And they were from various geographic locales, so one geographic designation would not suffice.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (18)</U></FONT> It is been held by some that designating those in provincial Galatia as "Galatians" would be insulting to them.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (19)</U></FONT> But we do not know this to be the case. It seems reasonable to suppose rather that they themselves would recognize the necessity for Paul to use this broad term in referring to the various locales in which he had established churches and was now sending them a letter.</div> <bR> <div> The mention of Barnabas in the letter </div> <div> Barnabas is mentioned three times in the letter to Galatians (2.1, 9, 13). It is suggested that the Galatians knew who Barnabas was, and in fact, it would have been a surprise to them that Barnabas was carried astray by the hypocrisy of Peter (vs. 13).<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (20)</U></FONT> While these references do not prove that the Galatians knew Barnabas, they do at least suggest a distinct possibility that they did know him,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (21)</U></FONT> by more than just reputation. Barnabas accompanied Paul only on his first missionary journey, so he would have never been to north Galatia with Paul, if indeed even Paul went there on his second journey. Any significance to the triple inclusion of Barnabas' name in the letter is lost if it was written to north Galatia. If the Galatians knew Barnabas, it would most likely be because of this first journey (Acts 14.12), and it would suggest that the Galatians are of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Pisisdian Antioch, congregations of provincial, not ethnic, Galatia.</div> <bR> <div> There is no clear record of Paul ever visiting and evangelizing the area of north Galatia </div> <div> Tenney states that "there is no record of any extended preaching or of any organization of churches in the north Galatian territory."<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (22)</U></FONT> If this is true, the likelihood that Paul was addressing churches he founded in north Galatia would be decreased (though the possibility still would exist). Further, some believe Paul never even visited north Galatia, as Acts 16.6 and 18.23 might seem to imply, and as many north Galatia proponents believe. Instead, the mentioning of Phrygia and Galatia are references to the same area, namely that of south Galatia, where Paul established the disciples of those churches which had already been founded.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (23)</U></FONT> Ramsay concluded that Luke's use of "the Galatic territory" in Acts 16 and 18 means specifically southern "provincial Galatia as opposed to ethnic Galatia."<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (24)</U></FONT></div> <div> Whether or not Paul would have traveled out of his way well into the north at this point, an inconvenient journey, is not a conclusive discussion to whether or not he actually went into the northern region. Longenecker notes that Paul was an evangelist, not a tourist.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (25)</U></FONT> Thus, he would be willing to go to inaccessible places if it was necessary. While Paul usually went to major cities which had Jewish synagogues, this does not mean that there were no major cities nor Jewish congregations in the north, or even that Paul would not have gone there without these.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (26)</U></FONT></div> <bR> <div> South Galatia had more contact with and familiarity with Jews and their religious practices </div> <div> The biblical evidence suggests that there were many Jews in the south Galatian region (Acts 13.14, 14.1), while there is little biblical evidence to suggest a large Jewish population in north Galatia. Because of this presence of Jews, many of whom became believers, there was a likelihood that the Judaizing influence to which Paul refers in Galatians was at work in the south Galatian churches.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (27)</U></FONT> However, there were Jews in north Galatia, in which case this argument may quickly lose its force.</div> <bR> <div> The similarity of circumstances in Acts 13-14 and the Galatian letter </div> <div> Several points of similarity seem to overlap between Galatians and the account of the founding of the churches in provincial south Galatia. These similarities may perform a corroborating role to the stronger evidence for south Galatia as the destination of the letter.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (28)</U></FONT> First, in Galatians 3.5, Paul notes the miracles that God was working among the Galatians as a result of their faith. In Acts 14.3, Paul and Barnabas performed signs and wonders in Iconium. It is possible that these events are what Paul refers to in Galatians 3.5. Second, Paul tells them that they welcomed him "as an angel of God" (Gal 4.14). In Acts 14.11, Paul was hailed almost as a god after he had healed the lame man in Lystra. Finally, in Gal 6.17, Paul refers to having "the marks of the Lord Jesus." Again, it is possible that he is referring to persecution which he suffered in Lystra in Acts 14.19.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (29)</U></FONT> These similarities certainly do not prove or even confirm the case for south Galatia; but they do provide parallels to which Paul may be making specific reference.</div> <bR> <div> Summary and brief evaluation of the theories </div> <div> Having examined the major arguments which are used to support the theories of north or south Galatia, which destination is more likely? Most of the arguments are not in and of themselves determinative. The direct evidence is simply too scanty. For the north Galatia theory, the strongest argument is that of church history. But this view seems to have been an assumption from early times, since the size of Galatia was greatly reduced to the northern parts early in history after the time of Paul (by the third century A.D.)<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (30)</U></FONT>. For the south Galatia theory, one of the strongest arguments is that Paul usually used provincial names for the places he visited and wrote about, thus it would not be strange at all for Paul to refer to provincial Galatia as "Galatia." In fact, to refer to the southern part of the province was normal for most people. In the case of the destination of the letter to Galatia, "Galatia" should be accorded its normal sense for Paul's usage unless there are specific reasons for not doing so. In this case, there are not. To call those churches in the southern part of the province "Galatians" was the best and most natural term to encompass them. Finally, a major benefit of taking the destination as south Galatia is because we have a somewhat extensive record of Paul's work of evangelization in that area (Acts 13-14). It enhances our knowledge of the letter if we have some understanding of the background of the churches to which the letter was written. Though the evidence for a solid decision is lacking, the more likely destination is that of south Galatia. The better evidence supports that theory.</div> <bR> <div> Date of Galatians </div> <div> How one decides on the date of Galatians depends in large part upon his or her theory of the destination of the letter, either north or south Galatia. While the destination does not necessarily determine the date,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (31)</U></FONT> it at least can limit one's options in regards to the date of the letter.</div> <bR> <div> The date according to the north Galatia theory </div> <div> The north Galatia theory seems to suggest a later date for the letter to Galatia to have been written, though only a general time frame can be determined. Certainly the letter was written after the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15, A.D. 49; or after the famine relief visit to Jerusalem, Acts 11), the probable Jerusalem visit referred to in Galatians 2. In addition, if Galatians 4.13 ("that I <I>first</I> announced the gospel to you") suggests that Paul visited north Galatia twice, the letter would have to be written during or after Paul's Ephesian ministry, prior to which Acts 18.23 suggests that he went through Phrygia and Galatia presumably a second time (around A.D. 54), during which he strengthened the disciples which were already in existence there.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (32)</U></FONT></div> <div> Lightfoot compared Galatians to Romans, a late Pauline book, noting the similarities which to him suggested a probable later date for Galatians also,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (33)</U></FONT> during the time Paul was in Corinth.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (34)</U></FONT> He of course recognized that a stylistic examination to determine the date was "a wide field open for conjecture."<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (35)</U></FONT> </div> <bR> <div> The date according to the south Galatia theory </div> <div> If Galatians was written after the famine relief visit, it may also have been written before the Jerusalem Council visit, thereby suggesting an early date (before A.D. 49) for the writing of the letter. If Galatians 2 refers to the Jerusalem Council, then of course the letter would have been written sometime after the council, between A.D. 50 and 57.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (36)</U></FONT> The issue of how Paul's five visits as recorded in Acts relates to the two visits mentioned in Galatians is more significant to the date of Galatia in regards to the south Galatia theory.</div> <bR> <div> The relation of Galatians to the chronology of Acts </div> <div> Galatians records two visits by Paul to Jerusalem, while Acts records five visits. The first visit was in Acts 9.26-31, shortly after his conversion. This visit is referred to by Paul in Galatians 1.18, when Paul spent time with Peter. Galatians says this was three years after his converson. The second visit mentioned in Galatians (2.1-10) might either be the famine relief visit of Acts 11, or the Jerusalem Council visit of Acts 15. This visit is noted in Galatians as being "after fourteen years," which could mean either fourteen years after the first visit, or fourteen years after his conversion.</div> <bR> <div> Galatians 2 = Acts 15: The Jerusalem Council </div> <div> There are several similarities between Galatians 2 and the Jerusalem Council recorded in Acts 15. The issue in both passages regards the Gentiles and their necessity of keeping of the Law. This is specified as circumcision in Acts 15, but is not specified in Galatians 2. In both passages, Paul and Barnabas associate with Peter and James during the visit. Finally, in both passages, Paul and Barnabas report of their preaching to the leaders in Jerusalem (Galatians 2.2, Acts 15.12).<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (37)</U></FONT></div> <div> One of the problems with this view is that Galatians 2 gives the impression of private conversations and meetings with Peter and James while Acts 15 suggests the convening of a somewhat public council. This is not an insurmountable problem, because public and private meetings often go hand in hand when a group gathers.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (38)</U></FONT> Another more significant problem is that Paul did not mention the decrees of the Jerusalem council when he wrote the Galatians a letter which had much to do with the conclusions of the council regarding Jew and Gentile and the Gentile relationship to the Law.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (39)</U></FONT> A third significant problem with this theory is Peter's actions as Paul records in Galatians 2.11-14, where Peter separated himself from fellowship with Gentiles when legalistic Jews came to Antioch, thus also leading Barnabas astray. Is it possible that this would have occurred after the Jerusalem Council, where it was decided upon by the apostles that Gentiles did not have to keep the Law in order to be saved and to relate to Jews? Peter's actions are shocking enough before the council, let alone after it. Longenecker notes that Paul's inclusion of this account, if it is after the Jerusalem Council "undercuts his whole argument and turns to the advantage of his judaizing opponents."<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (40)</U></FONT> Carson, Moo, and Morris conclude "Peter's withdrawal from table fellowship with the Gentiles (2.12) is more likely before than after the council."<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (41)</U></FONT></div> <bR> <div> Galatians 2 = Acts 11.27-30: The Famine Relief Visit </div> <div> The direct similarities between Galatians 2 and Acts 11.27-30, the famine relief visit, are fewer, but there are some incidental similarities. In Acts 11.30, all that is said is that Paul and Barnabas were sent to Jerusalem to help provide relief from Antioch, and they delivered provisions to the elders. This lack of specificity regarding what they did in Jerusalem certainly allows for the possibility that this visit is the one referred to in Galatians 2. The informal nature that both Galatians 2 and Acts 11 seem to display might be considered as similarity between the two complementary.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (42)</U></FONT> "Again" in Galatians 2.1 may refer to the next, that is, second, visit to Jerusalem.<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (43)</U></FONT> Paul's first visit was in Acts 9 and mentioned in Galatians 1.18. The very next visit would thus be the famine relief visit of Acts 11. Otherwise, it may be strange that Paul would neglect to mention the famine relief visit if Galatians 2 were not referring to it. That Paul went to Jerusalem by a revelation may parallel the prophecy of the famine given by Agabus (Acts 11.28).<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (44)</U></FONT> In Galatians 2, Paul recounts that they were encouraged to remember the poor (Gal 2.10). This statement has contextual linkage with the famine relief of Acts 11.</div> <div> According to this theory, if the famine visit was in A.D. 46-47,<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><U> (45)</U></FONT> then one must understand "after three years" (Gal 1.18) and "after fourteen years" (Gal 2.1) as both being counted from Paul's conversion, for a total of fourteen years.</div> <div> These lines of connection between Galatians 2 and Acts 11 merely allow for the possibility that the visit of Paul to Jerusalem in Galatians 2 is the famine relief visit, because there is not direct evidence of this. This may be the biggest obstacle to this theory. But the problems with the theory that Galatians 2 = Acts 15.1-30, the Jerusalem Council, leads me to conclude that the Galatians 2 visit is probably the famine relief visit of Acts 11.</div> <bR> <div> CONCLUSION</div> <div> The issue of whether Paul was writing to north or south Galatia, and when he wrote, is not an issue of great certainty. But probability falls on the side of the letter being written to south Galatia at a date shortly before the Jerusalem Council (A.D. 49). Understanding this allows the interpreter to read Galatians with a more detailed context by giving a knowledge of specific churches to which Paul was writing.</div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="n_1_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>1. Richard Longenecker, <I>Galatians</I>, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 41 (Dallas: Word Books, 1990) lxii-lxiii. James M. Boice, "Galatians," <I>The Expositor's Bible Commentary, </I>vol. 10, ed. Frank Gaebelien (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976) 412. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_2_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>2. F.F. Bruce, "Galatians Problems: North or South Galatians?" <I>Bulletin of the John Rylands Library</I> 52 (1969-70), 247. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_3_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>3. Ibid., 247. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_4_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>4. Hans Dieter Betz, <I>A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Churches in Galatia</I> (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979) 4. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_5_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>5. Ibid., 5. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_6_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>6. J. B. Lightfoot, <I>The Epistle to the Galatians</I> (Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 1978; original pub. 1865) 19. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_7_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>7. Ibid., 19. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_8_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>8. Ibid., 14-15. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_9_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>9. Ibid., 22. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_10_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>10. Ibid., 24. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_11_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>11. Merril C. Tenney, <I>Galatians: The Charter of Christian Liberty</I> (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1966) 54. Ridderbos also suggests that the South Galatians had greater familarity with Jewish religion than those in the North, and such familiarity is assumed in the letter; in fact the North Galatian church was made of almost exclusively Gentiles, in his view (24-26). </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_12_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>12. Betz, 4-5. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_13_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>13. Herman Ridderbos, <I>The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia</I> (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953) 3. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_14_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>14. Timothy George, <I>Galatians</I>, The New American Commentary, vol. 30, ed. Ray Clendenen (Nashville: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 1994) 43. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_15_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>15. W.M. Ramsay, quoted by Richard Longenecker, <I>Galatians</I>, lxvi. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_16_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>16. George, 43. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_17_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>17. Ernest DeWitt Burton, <I>A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians</I> (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1921, reprint 1964) xxix. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_18_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>18. Donald Guthrie, <I>Galatians</I>, The Century Bible, ed. H.H. Rowley (London, WI: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1969) 24. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_19_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>19. Ibid., 24. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_20_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>20. Ibid., 25. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_21_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>21. R. Alan Cole, <I>The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians: An Introduction and Commentary</I>, 2nd ed. Tyndale N.T. Commentaries, ed. Leon Morris (Leicester, England: Intervarsity Press, 1989) 23. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_22_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>22. Tenney, 54. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_23_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>23. Ibid., 49. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_24_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>24. Longenecker, lxvii. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_25_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>25. Ibid., lxix. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_26_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>26. Ibid., lxix. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_27_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>27. Tenney, 54-55. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_28_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>28. Guthrie, 27. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_29_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>29. George, 44-45. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_30_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>30. G. Walter Hansen, <I>Galatians</I>, The IVP Commentary Series, ed. Grant Osborne (Downers Grove, Ill: Intervarsity Press, 1994) 17. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_31_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>31. Longenecker, lxxiii. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_32_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>32. Guthrie, 28. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_33_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>33. Lightfoot, 44-49. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_34_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>34. George, 46. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_35_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>35. Lightfoot, 36. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_36_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>36. G. W. Hansen, "Galatians," <I>Dictionary of Paul and His Letters</I>, ed. Gerald Hawthorne and Ralph Martin (Downers Grove, Ill: Intervarsity Press, 1993). </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_37_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>37. Longenecker, lxxvii. Guthrie, 29. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_38_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>38. Guthrie, 30. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_39_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>39. George, 49. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_40_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>40. Longenecker, lxxx. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_41_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>41. D.A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris, <I>An Introduction to the New Testament</I> (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992) 293. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_42_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>42. Guthrie, 32. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_43_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>43. Ibid., 32. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_44_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>44. Cole, 101. </div> <div>  <A NAME="n_45_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>45. Longenecker, lxxxii. </div> <bR> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> copyright, 1999, Stanley Baker</div> <div> www.stanbaker.org</div> </td> </tr></table></body>