The Great Galatians Debate:

Transcript

1 Galatians: A look at its Historical Reliability 1 The Great Galatians Debate: Did Paul Write The Letter To The Galatians" Stephen Walch Stephen Walch - June, 2010

2 Contents The Great Galatians Debate: Did the Hebrew Sha uwl, known as Paul, write the letter known as To the Galatians?... 1 Introduction to the Pauline letters... 2 Galatians: A look at its Historical Reliability... 9 His story or not His story? It s all a Matter of Semantics Ephesians contains 35 unique words not found elsewhere in the NT words in Ephesians are not found in the rest of the Pauline corpus but are found in the rest of the NT There are 15 expressions used in Ephesians not found in other Pauline letters Ephesians is based too heavily on Colossians, stealing many of Colossians ideas and sentence-structure There are differing theologies with the rest of Sha uwl/paul s letters Answering Final Objections Objection 1: Doesn t Peter refer to Sha uwl/paul s letter to the Galatians in 2 Peter 3:15-16? Objection 2: Only Paul would ve noticed that seed in Genesis was singular in the Hebrew, and not plural Objection 3: Sha uwl/paul always writes an insignia at the end of his letters so that frauds couldn t be perpetrated Objection 4: Doesn t Galatians use vocabulary prone to Sha uwl/paul? Objection 5: Doesn t Galatians appear in P46, the oldest known manuscript of Sha uwl/paul s letters dated between CE? Final Conclusion Appendix A: Greek-English Interlinear of Galatians Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter

3 Chapter Chapter Appendix B - Word Statistics: 1. The Set-Apart Word Group αγιος/hagios in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) αγιαζω/hagiazo in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) αγιασμος/hagiasmos in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) αγιωσυνη/hagiosune in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) αγιος/hagios in the Renewed Covenant αγιαζω/hagiazo in the Renewed Covenant αγιασμος/hagiasmos in the Renewed Covenant αγιωσυνη/hagiosune in the Renewed Covenant αγιοτης/hagiotes in the Renewed Covenant The Spirit πνευμα/pneuma in the Pauline Literature πνευμα /pneuma θυ thu in the Attributed Pauline Literature αγιος πνευμα/hagios pneuma in the Renewed Covenant Authority εξουσια/exousia in the Renewed Covenant εξουσιαζω/exousiazo in the Renewed Covenant κατεξουσιαζω/katexousiazo in the Renewed Covenant εξεστιν/exestin in the Renewed Covenant The Deliverance Word Group σωζω/sozo in the Renewed Covenant σωτηρ/soter in the Renewed Covenant σωτηρια/soteria in the Renewed Covenant σωτηριος/soterios in the Renewed Covenant : Separation θανατος/thanatos in the Renewed Covenant : To Be Joyous χαιρω/chairo in the Renewed Covenant

4 7: Affliction θλιψις/thlipsis in the Renewed Covenant : Knowledge γνωσις/gnosis in the Renewed Covenant : Intellectual Errancy κακος/kakos in the Renewed Covenant Evil πονηρος/poneros in the Attributed Pauline Literature The Diaspora διασπορα/diaspora in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) διασπορα/diaspora in the Greek Pseudepigrapha διασπορα/diaspora in the Renewed Covenant Seed σπερμα/sperma in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) Testament) zera /זרע in the Tanakh (Old σπερμα/sperma in the Renewed Covenant On The Contrary αλλα/alla in the Renewed Covenant Writings : Favour χαρις/charis in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) Testament) khen /חן in the Tanakh (Old Where χαρις/charis translates khen /חן in the Tanakh Where khen /חן isn t translated as χαρις/charis in the LXX Where χαρις/charis isn t a translation of khen /חן in the LXX The use of χαρις/charis in Sirach χαρις/charis in the Pseudepigrapha χαρις/charis in the Renewed Covenant The Declare Good News Word Group εyαγγελiζω/euangelizo in the Renewed Covenant ευαγγελιον/euangelion in the Renewed Covenant Elements

5 στοιχειον/stoicheion in the Renewed Covenant The Trust Word Group πιστευω/pisteuo in the Renewed Covenant πιστικος/pistikos in the Renewed Covenant πιστος/pistos in the Renewed Covenant πιστοω/pistoo in the Renewed Covenant πιστις/pistis in the Renewed Covenant ο πιστις/ho pistis in the Attributed Pauline Literature Mercy ελεος/eleos in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) Tanakh khesed /חסד in the Where ελεος/eleos translates khesed /חסד in the Tanakh The Declared Upright Word Group δικαιος/dikaios in the Attributed Pauline Literature δικαιοω/dikaioo in the Attributed Pauline Literature δικαιοσυνη/dikaiosune in the Attributed Pauline Literature Appendix C: Tables For Data Contained In Pages Bibliography of Works Cited Index of Direct Tanakh, Greek Septuagint, And Renewed Covenant Quotes

6 The Great Galatians Debate 1 The Great Galatians Debate: Did the Hebrew Sha uwl, known as Paul, write the letter known as To the Galatians? Whilst such a question is rarely (if ever) asked in scholarly circles or by the public in general, especially by Christian Scholars, it is a question that must be asked: Did Sha uwl/paul write (or more accurately dictate) the letter to the Galatians, or did someone else write it, claiming that Sha uwl/paul was its author? This is a question I hope to solve by the end of this study, which is not just regarding the letter to the Galatians, but of the other letters attributed to Sha uwl/paul too. When one reads a translation of Sha uwl/paul s alleged letter to the Galatians, there is but only one conclusion that can be grasped from its words: Galatians is a treatise against following the Torah of Yahuweh; a homily that seeks to separate the Torah from the Messiah Yahushua (incorrectly referred to as Jesus Christ); a theological document attempting to show that the Torah is worthless and is in fact something that enslaves us. The letter to the Galatians is therefore the foundation of the religion of Christianity, for with Galatians, Christians have their Scriptural Authority for completely disregarding Yahuweh and his instructions as outlined in the Torah, and so this is a severe problem, for this goes against Yahuweh. As Galatians is the foundation of Christianity, then Sha uwl/paul is just plain wrong, simple as. There is no other logical conclusion to the facts. If Galatians was written by Sha uwl/paul, then nothing he ever says can be trusted 100%, or in fact, at all. This is then even more devastating to Christianity. Without Sha uwl/paul, then 99% of what Christendom and the Church denominations teach is without any support in their Bible, as the rest of the Torah, Prophets and Psalms are against what most of Christianity affirms as the truth. This also brings another conclusion: Sha uwl/paul didn t write Scripture, ever. As Yahuweh can t contradict Himself, if Yahuweh is the one inspiring Sha uwl/paul to write Galatians, then Yahuweh cannot be trusted, as He would be contradicting Himself at every turn. And then, Yahuweh wouldn t be God, and therefore the entire Bible is just random thoughts and made up stories and fables concocted by the wills, desires and imagination of humankind. But thankfully, as the Torah, Prophets and Psalms prove without a shadow of a doubt that Yahuweh can be trusted 100%, then Galatians isn t from Yahuweh, but only from the mind of the person who wrote it, whether it be Sha uwl/paul, or someone else. Therefore, once again we have another issue with Christianity, as most of what they teach is based on the belief

7 The Great Galatians Debate 2 that Sha uwl/paul wrote inspired Scripture. As Sha uwl/paul didn t write inspired Scripture, then Christianity s entire foundation is suspect, and that isn t good. The only solid rock we have is the Torah, Prophets and Psalms - nothing else. This is all, of course, if Sha uwl/paul did indeed write/dictate the words encompassed in the Galatians letter. If he didn t, then the case against Sha uwl/paul would have to be based on what he says in other letters. If he did, then Sha uwl/paul can only be condemned for going against Yahuweh. And that is the simple truth, and there is no way to get around it. Introduction to the Pauline letters Before we get to Galatians itself, a brief overview of the Pauline letters is a must. There are 14 letters/epistles/books in the Renewed Covenant Writings (incorrectly known as the New Testament) attributed to Sha uwl/paul: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon and Hebrews. Of these 14, most of Christendom only accepts 13 of them to have been written or dictated by Sha uwl/paul, attributing Hebrews to an unknown author, but a person to whom was known by Sha uwl/paul as Hebrews mentions Timothy (Heb. 13:23). Scholars, however, have dwindled down the actual Pauline letters to just 7: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon, claiming that the other 6(7) have different or divergent language and style, the absence of Pauline concepts, the presence of concepts not found in other undisputed letters, and difficulties in historical settings 1 (added bold-font mine). The general scholarly consensus of these 7 letters to be by Sha uwl/paul has given rise to the term Undisputed Letters, and therefore the other 6(7) to be designated Disputed Letters, where scholars are divided with their opinions. However, at around 1840, a German scholar named Ferdinand Christian Baur concluded that Sha uwl/paul only wrote four of the letters attributed to him: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, and Galatians. Nevertheless, his successors refined Baur s methods and added Philemon, 1 Thessalonians and Philippians to the undisputed letters list, and no scholar since then has ever really attempted to disprove them. The final 6 letters, Colossians, Ephesians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus, are split into two camps: the deutero-pauline letters: Colossians, Ephesians and 2 Thessalonians; and those known as the Pastoral epistles : 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. Due to Ephesians supposed reliance on Colossians, they are both disregarded and said to have both been written by a different author, who wrote Colossians first 1

8 Introduction to the Pauline Letters 3 and then further developed the idea s mentioned in Colossians in the longer Ephesians letter. 2 Thessalonians is also disregarded due to the same reasoning, in that 2 Thessalonians relies too heavily on 1 Thessalonians for structure, language and ideas. The final three, the Pastoral Epistles are disregarded due to the fact that they make [Sha uwl/]paul presuppose the hierarchical structure of the church in the 2 nd Century, with his mention of overseer s and deacons. The Greek of 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus is also a vast improvement on Sha uwl/paul s other letters. Whether Sha uwl/paul wrote any of the other disputed letters is not the concern of this document. However, if or when I may refer to any of the disputed letters, I will do so cautiously, and make sure that I continually reference that they are part of the disputed section. Nevertheless, as I am seeking to either prove or disprove whether Galatians is a letter of Sha uwl/paul or a forgery, then I am going against the general scholarly consensus, and if they re wrong with regarding Galatians as a definite letter of Sha uwl/paul s, then surely this would call into question whether they are right with thinking that the disputed letters are really not the work of Sha uwl/paul, and that they may also be wrong with thinking that the rest of the undisputed letters are certainly the work of Sha uwl/paul. With the introduction done, let us proceed on to what evidence is given to consider that Galatians is definitely the work of Sha uwl/paul. 1. Sha uwl/paul s name is mentioned more than once Oddly, this is one thing that is brought up quite often to prove that Sha uwl/paul did indeed write Galatians: it mentions his name more than once, and apparently most forgers wouldn t. It s certainly true that Galatians mentions Sha uwl/paul s name more than once, as it does it twice: Gal 1:1 & 5:2. However, another undisputed letter of Paul s, that to the Romans, only mentions Sha uwl/paul once in 1:1. This is also the same for Philippians, where Sha uwl/paul is only mentioned once in Phil. 1:1. Of the other undisputed letters, 1 Corinthians names Sha uwl/paul eight times 2 ; 2 Corinthians twice 3 ; 1Thessalonians twice 4 ; and Philemon three times 5. On the other hand, looking to the disputed letters, Titus, 1 & 2 Timothy mention Sha uwl/paul s name once 6 ; 2 Thessalonians twice 7 ; Colossians 2 1 Cor. 1:1, 12, 13; 3:4, 5, 22; 16: Cor. 1:1; 10:1 4 1 Thess. 1:1; 2:18 5 Philem. 1, 9, 19 6 Titus 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1 7 2 Thess. 1:1; 3:17

9 Introduction to the Pauline Letters 4 three times 8 ; and Ephesians twice 9. It is only Hebrews that never mentions Sha uwl/paul s name at all. If the mentioning of Sha uwl/paul s name is criteria for accepting a letter as written by him, then the only disputed letter therefore is Hebrews, not any of the others. If the amount of times that Sha uwl/paul has his name written is evidence for a letter definitely being from him, then we would have to include Romans and Philippians as part of the disputed section, and 2 Thessalonians, Colossians and Ephesians as part of the undisputed section. Problem with this is that 1 & 2 Corinthians, and 1 Thessalonians, are reliant on Romans and Philippians being undisputed letters of Sha uwl/paul in order for them to be undisputed letters as well. As this would therefore call into question each and every one of the letters attributed to Sha uwl/paul, the only conclusion would be that Sha uwl/paul didn t write any letters, ever, and all of them are forgeries just attributed to a famous teacher. This is therefore a preposterous point of criteria for deciding whether a letter is from Sha uwl/paul or not - the mention, or lack thereof, of Sha uwl/paul s name from a piece of writing is neither a for or against argument regarding a letter s supposed genuineness. 2. Sha uwl/paul writes his own superscription at the end of his letters with his own hand One can see from reading Sha uwl/paul s letters, that most, if not all, are personal letters sent to people that Sha uwl/paul knows intimately, or is going to meet. As a result, Sha uwl/paul would usually have an amanuensis write the core of the letter, and Sha uwl/paul himself would write the superscription or postscript at the end of the letter with his own hand. Galatians contains such a postscript (6:11), but there is some discussion on whether Sha uwl/paul just wrote the line translated as See with what large letters I am writing to you with my own hand, or whether he wrote the whole of verses If we were to check the undisputed letters, we find a few peculiar things. In Romans, there is no superscription or postscript alleged to be written by Sha uwl/paul s own hand. The same is also true of 1 Thessalonians, 2 Corinthians and Philippians. 1 Corinthians has such a postscript (16:21), but it is of a different nature, This greeting is in my own hand - Paul. Again, there is debate on whether Sha uwl/paul just wrote this line, or whether he wrote the whole of verses Sha uwl/paul is also said to have written this in Philemon 19, I, Paul, write this with my own hand: I will repay it. But this isn t a postscript or superscription, but merely Sha uwl/paul making sure that Philemon knew that Sha uwl/paul was going to give whatever was owed to 8 Col. 1:1, 23; 4:18 9 Eph. 1:1; 3:1

10 Introduction to the Pauline Letters 5 Philemon. Therefore, apart from Galatians, only one of Sha uwl/paul s undisputed letters contains a postscript/superscription - Romans, 2 Corinthians, 1 Thessalonians, Philippians and Philemon don t contain such a thing. Of the disputed letters however, Colossians and 2 Thessalonians contain the exact same postscript/superscription as found in 1 Corinthians; the rest of the disputed letters contain no postscript/superscription. The undisputed and disputed letters are therefore split down the middle: two from each section contain superscriptions/postscripts, and 5 from each section don t contain one. However, Galatians stands on its own, as the superscription/postscript found in Galatians is completely unlike those found in other letters. 3. Sha uwl/paul writes personal greetings to members of the Church/Ekklesia Due to the fact that Sha uwl/paul wrote to specific people and specific places, it was quite natural for Sha uwl/paul to send personal greetings to people he knew. Romans for example dedicates 19(!) verses 10 to Sha uwl/paul s personal greetings to the members of the Ekklesia in Rome; 1 Corinthians dedicates 9 verses 11 ; 2 Corinthians dedicates 1 verse 12 ; Philippians dedicates 5 verses 13 ; Philemon dedicates 2 verses 14 ; and 1 Thessalonians dedicates 3 verses 15. The only undisputed letter to not contain any greeting of any sort is Galatians, where the usual greeting is completely absent from the end of the letter. Of the disputed letters, Colossians dedicates 11 verses 16 ; Ephesians dedicates 3 verses 17 ; Titus dedicates 4 verses 18 ; 1 Timothy dedicates 1 verse 19 ; and 2 Timothy dedicates 8 verses 20. Only 2 Thessalonians contains no personal greeting at the end of the letter, but that depends on whether you take the personal superscription/postscript as a mark of Sha uwl/paul s personal greeting. To be fair, I haven t. The completely rejected letter, Hebrews, actually dedicates 3 verses 21 to a personal greeting to the letter s intended audience, who appear to know Timothy. The evidence is once again split in 10 Rom. 16:1-16, Cor. 16:10, 12, Cor. 13:13 13 Philipp. 4:2-3, 18, Phile Thess. 5: Col. 4: Eph. 6: Titus 3: Tim. 6: Tim 4:10-14, Heb. 13:22-24

11 Introduction to the Pauline Letters 6 this regard, with 1 from each side not containing a personal greeting. Saying that, only Galatians is the culprit in the undisputed side. 4. Sha uwl/paul mentions the names of those together with him at the writing of the letter A perfect example of this is 1 Thessalonians 1:1, Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the Ekklesia of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Upright One, Messiah Yahushua. Sha uwl/paul has mentioned that Silvanus and Timothy are together with him as he is writing this letter. The other undisputed letters that personally mention the names of those with Sha uwl/paul at the writing of the letter are as follows: Philippians 22, Romans 23, 1 Corinthians 24, 2 Corinthians 25, and Philemon 26. Again, Galatians is missing from this list. Of the disputed letters that personally mention the names of those with Sha uwl/paul are as follows: 2 Thessalonians 27, Colossians 28, Titus 29, 2 Timothy 30 and Ephesians 31. 1st Timothy doesn t mention the names of anyone with Sha uwl/paul at the writing of the letter. So, Galatians is again the only undisputed letter not sharing anything with the rest of the undisputed letters. And most of the disputed letters also mention the names of people with Sha uwl/paul at the time. Hebrews makes no mention of who is with the author. 5. The letter in question is historically reliable in the context of Sha uwl/paul s life Where exactly scholars can place the letter in what is known of Sha uwl/paul s life, usually to how the history of Sha uwl/paul is recorded in Acts, leads them to consider the letter in question to be authentic. The Romans letter, therefore, can be traced back to the winter of 55-56CE, when Sha uwl/paul was in Achaia (Southern Greece) as referenced in Acts 20: Corinthians was written in 54CE from Ephesus, where Sha uwl/paul spent three years as recorded by Acts Philip. 1:1 23 Rom. 16: Cor. 1: Cor. 1:1 26 Phile Thess. 1:1 28 Col. 1:1 29 Titus 3: Tim. 4:11 31 Eph. 6:21

12 Introduction to the Pauline Letters 7 Corinthians was written near the autumn of 55CE, whilst Sha uwl/paul was in Thessalonica or Philippi on his way to Greece as referenced in Acts 20:1-2. Philippians was written when he was imprisoned for two years in Rome in 60-62CE as referenced in Acts 28:30. 1 Thessalonians, usually accepted to be Sha uwl/paul s earliest letter, was written in 50CE, when Sha uwl/paul was staying in Corinth as referenced in Acts 18:1-3. Philemon, along with Philippians, was written when Sha uwl/paul was imprisoned for two years in Rome in 60-62CE as referenced in Acts 28:30. But when it comes to Galatians, however, I ll let the words of Scholar Richard N. Longenecker answer this for me when he states, Without a doubt, the date of Galatians is one of the most knotty problems in Pauline studies. 32 I ll talk more about this later, but all of the commentaries I ve read on the Pauline letters (15 up to now), each one spends at least 90% more time on discussing the historical inaccuracies and problems caused by Galatians than any other commentary done on the other undisputed letters. When it comes to the disputed letters, when commentaries hypothetically accept them as official letters of Sha uwl/paul, there is little difficulty in placing them in the context of Sha uwl/paul s life. 2 Thessalonians is therefore dated to have been written in 50 CE, not that long after writing 1 Thessalonians. Colossians is placed at around 60-62CE, said to have been written in conjunction with Sha uwl/paul s personal letter to Philemon. Ephesians is also dated at around 60-62CE, again, said to have been written in conjunction with Philemon and Colossians. Titus and 1 & 2 Timothy on the other hand can t be compared to Acts. Acts literally stops at Sha uwl/paul s imprisonment in Rome for 2 years, which were between the years of 60-62CE. Sha uwl/paul is said to have died sometime in 66-67CE, therefore Acts leaves 4-5 years of Sha uwl/paul s life unrecorded. It is therefore quite easy to just state that Titus and 1 & 2 Timothy are written sometime during this period, after Sha uwl/paul is released from his imprisonment in Rome and he again takes up his journey. Reconstructing this journey from Titus and 1 & 2 Timothy, after Sha uwl/paul s Roman imprisonment, he travelled to Crete along with Timothy and Titus (who had come back from Corinth) 33 ; then, leaving Titus in Crete 34, Sha uwl/paul and Timothy headed for Ephesus in Asia Minor 35 ; encountering some difficulties in Ephesus, Sha uwl/paul leaves Timothy there 36 and takes Tychicus with him to Macedonia 37, where Sha uwl/paul writes Titus a letter as well as his first letter to Timothy; in Macedonia, however, Sha uwl/paul is once again arrested and 32 Richard N. Longenecker Word Biblical Commentary, Volume 41: Galatians, pp. lxxiii. 33 Titus 1:5 34 Titus 1: Tim. 1: Tim. 1: Tim. 1:3

13 Introduction to the Pauline Letters 8 taken back to Rome, accompanied by Tychicus and Lucus 38, where Sha uwl/paul writes his second letter to Timothy, sends Tychicus to Ephesus with the letter and then has Timothy come to Sha uwl/paul in Rome 39, where Sha uwl/paul is murdered. Titus and 1 Timothy were then probably written around 64-65CE, and then 2 Timothy written around 66-67CE, not long before Sha uwl/paul s death. All in all, it appears that scholars have had far less trouble placing a date to each of the Disputed Pauline letters than they have with Galatians 40. One has to wonder why Occam's razor 41 is never applied to the Pauline corpus of letters. 6. Pauline words, phrases and theology are employed This, I think, is only the second worthwhile condition up to now for whether a letter is from Sha uwl/paul or not. Due to Greek being Sha uwl/paul s 4 th language, it is quite natural, and logical, to presume that Sha uwl/paul would use phrases, words, and general vocabulary that he would have known, and not really vary his usage. However, I think it would be also safe to presume that over time, Sha uwl/paul s Greek vocabulary would increase, so later letters would probably contain a more varied and increased vocabulary and phrase structure. So, once a date for a letter has been decided upon, then those letters closest to each other should be compared to discover what words and phrases were being used at the time. Those letters that show a marked difference from those written at the same time should therefore be questioned and studied to determine why a marked variance is evidence that it is a letter of Sha uwl/paul s, and not a forged one with Sha uwl/paul s name attached to it. As it happens, however, most scholars compare the disputed letter s against those that are classed as undisputed to discover whether they show a marked language difference. No undisputed letter is ever really compared to anything, and they are used as the core basis for determining Sha uwl/paul s vocabulary and style. These are the following reasons, based on a scholars study of the vocabulary, for why Ephesians isn t an authentic letter of Sha uwl/paul s: words are unique to Ephesians compared to the rest of the NT Tim 4: Tim 4:9 40 In the New American Commentary series for example, Seventeen pages are dedicated to the Authorship and historical reliability of all the Pastoral Epistles (Titus, 1 & 2 Timothy); whereas with Galatians, twenty-two(!) pages are dedicated to merely its historical reliability C. Leslie Mitton, The Epistle to the Ephesians: Its Authorship, Origin and Purpose (Oxford: Clarendon, 1950), 8-9; Kummel, Introduction to the New Testament (note 2), 358.

14 Introduction to the Pauline Letters words in Ephesians are not found in the rest of the Pauline corpus but are found in the rest of the NT There are 15 expressions used in Ephesians not found in other Pauline letters Ephesians uses extremely long sentence structures not found in other Pauline letters. 5. Ephesians is based too heavily on Colossians, stealing many of Colossians ideas and sentence-structure. 6. Ephesians pays more emphasis on the Messiah s resurrection compared to the other Pauline epistles that pay more emphasis to the Messiah s death on the upright stake. 7. Ephesians stresses more emphasis on ecclesiology Ephesians does not mention the return of the Messiah or Judgement. 46 Now, I actually think that the scholars have a very good point here with regards to Ephesians, so I don t disagree at all with the conclusion that Ephesians wasn t written by Sha uwl/paul - what I do disagree with however, is the fact that based on the 8 points above, Galatians should also be rejected as a Pauline letter. The hypocrisy of scholars is completely ridiculous - one has to wonder how much Christian scholars appear to just love Galatians to the point that their eyes are blurred whenever discussing it. With all of this in mind, let s finally turn our attention to the actual point of all of this: The letter to the Galatians. Galatians: A look at its Historical Reliability Out of all the reasons used to determine the Pauline Authorship of a letter as outlined above, there are only two that have any sort of significance to our discussion, the main one being this: is The letter to the Galatians reliable in the context of Sha uwl/paul s life? We shall go through Galatians, refer to the other letters if occasion calls for it, and especially look to see if Galatians can be 43 Robert Morgenthaler, Statistik des neutestamenliche Wortschatzes, 4 th ed. (Zuerich: Gotthelf-Verlag, 1992), 164.) 44 Andrew T. Lincoln, Ephesians, World Biblical Commentary Volume 42, 1xv. 45 Ecclesiology is the study of the role of the Ekklesia/Church For a more detailed analysis of points 4-8, see Ernest Best, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Ephesians, pp

15 Galatians: A look at its Historical Reliability 10 historically placed when cross-checking it with the book of Acts. So, the first question must be asked: who exactly are the Galatians? According to nearly every mention of them, the Galatians are basically a group of Celtic Gauls (these Celts had migrated in all directions from their origin in France/Austria, spreading throughout most of Europe), who came to occupy a slot of land in today s Central Turkey (referred to in Ancient times as Anatolia). They were originally invited by Nicomedes I of Bithynia, to act as mercenaries in his fight against his younger brother Zipoites II, who had started an insurrection against Nicomedes, due to Nicomedes putting to death two of three his brothers, Zipoites II being next in the firing line. After aiding Nicomedes, these Celts settled in a section of Bithynia, as well as a section of eastern Phrygia, and their new land was named Galatia. Being a very active and warlike group of people, they supported themselves by plundering their neighbouring countries and districts, especially entering eastern Phrygia. Alexander the Great also fought against them, and he managed to keep them at bay, but he never defeated them, nor officially incorporated them into his Hellenistic empire. These Celts eventually became part of the Roman Empire, when in 189 BCE the Roman Consul Gnaeus Manlius Vulso defeated them. The Land of Galatia was henceforth ruled by the Romans, and eventually it became a Roman Province in 25BCE, during the reign of the Emperor Augustus. Not only was the land of Galatia included in the Province of Galatia, but also certain sections of Phrygia (to the west) and Lycaonia (to the south) were also incorporated. However, there is no evidence that these Celts, who had now been officially designated as Galatians, ever went anywhere else outside of their land of Galatia, with them staying in or directly around their three main cities: Ancyra, Tavium and Pessinus. The ethnic Galatians then lived in the Land of Galatia, a land 215 miles wide by 100 miles in length, covering roughly 21,000 square miles. The actual Province of Galatia, which had a great number of different ethnicities, having mostly ethnic Lycaonians in the south and ethnic Phrygians in the west, covered roughly 82,000 square miles, being 300 miles wide and 275 miles in length. With this in mind, we have to ask: when did Sha uwl/paul come into contact with people he could definitely refer to as Galatians 47? For such a task, we must turn to the testimony of the Book of Acts regarding Sha uwl/paul s journeys. From what we can decipher from Acts, after Sha uwl/paul converted on his way to Damascus 48, he joined with the Ekklesia there 49, but due to his preaching, some Jews wanted to kill him 50, and so Sha uwl/paul was let down in a basket 47 Galatians 3:1 48 Acts 9:1-19a 49 Acts 9:19b 50 Acts 9:23-24 Stephen Walch - June, 2010

16 Galatians: A look at its Historical Reliability 11 through a window hole in the Damascus city wall in order to escape 51. Sha uwl/paul then went to Jerusalem and attempted to join with the Ekklesia there as well, but he didn t have much luck by himself 52. Then Barnabas took Sha uwl/paul to the Ekklesia, explained to them what had apparently happened to him on the way to Damascus, and so Sha uwl/paul was accepted 53. After some preaching in Jerusalem, Acts again records that certain Hellenistic Jews wanted to kill him 54, so Sha uwl/paul was taken down to Caesarea, and sent off to his home city of Tarsus 55. Acts then again picks up the story of Sha uwl/paul in Acts 11:25, where Barnabas, of his own accord, goes off from Antioch in Syria to Tarsus 56, finds Sha uwl/paul, and then brings him back to Antioch, where they both stay and preach for a whole year 57. After this, some Prophets from Jerusalem come to Antioch 58, and one of them, Agabus, foretells that a great famine will take place over the Roman Empire 59. As a result, the Ekklesia of Antioch in Syria pull their resources, and then send Barnabas and Sha uwl/paul to the elders of the Ekklesia in Judea with the money they had collected as a Relief fund for the people of the Ekklesia living there 60. They both then return from Jerusalem to Antioch in Syria 61, and then they are sent off again from Antioch 62. So starts Sha uwl/paul s First missionary journey. Sha uwl/paul and Barnabas set out first for the Island of Cypress 63, and then they come back to Pamphylia in the south-west of Asia Minor 64. After Pamphylia they stop in Antioch of Pisidia 65, where after some preaching, they are driven out and they go to Iconium 66, a major city on the borders of the lands of Phrygia and Lycaonia 67. A similar thing that happened at Antioch of Pisidia happens in Iconium, and so Barnabas and Sha uwl/paul flee to Lystra in the land of Lycaonia 68. In Lystra, Sha uwl/paul heals a crippled man, and as a result the Lystrians attempt to sacrifice animals to 51 Acts 9:25 52 Acts 9:26 53 Acts 9:27 54 Acts 9: Acts 9:30 56 Acts 11:25 57 Acts 11:26 58 Acts 11:27 59 Acts 11:28 60 Acts 11: Acts 12:25 62 Acts 13: Acts 13:4 64 Acts 13:13 65 Acts 13:14 66 Acts 13:51 67 See The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3, pp Acts 14:6

17 Galatians: A look at its Historical Reliability 12 Sha uwl/paul and Barnabas, saying that they were the Greek gods Zeus and Hermes 69. Sha uwl/paul and Barnabas stop them from doing so, but with a lot of difficulty 70. This offends them, and when some people from Iconium come down and start preaching against Sha uwl/paul and Barnabas, the Lystrians grab Sha uwl/paul and stone him, dragging him out of the city 71. Sha uwl/paul miraculously gets up, goes back into Lystra for a bit, and then Sha uwl/paul and Barnabas leave for Derbe, another city in Lycaonia 72. After this, Sha uwl/paul and Barnabas return back through Lystra, Iconium, Antioch of Pisidia, the land of Pamphylia, and then sail back to Antioch in Syria 73. In Antioch in Syria, Sha uwl/paul and Barnabas come into a severe discussion with some other members of the Ekklesia regarding the circumcision of Gentile members of the Ekklesia 74. Being unable to decide the outcome, Sha uwl/paul and Barnabas are sent to Jerusalem to discuss the debate with the Jerusalem elders 75, which included the Apostle Peter, and Ya qob, the Messiah Yahushua s half-brother. After the Jerusalem elders have come to a decision, they compose a letter to be taken to Antioch of Syria, Syria itself, and Cilicia, Sha uwl/paul s native land, which they send with two representatives - Judas Barsabbas (or more accurately: Yahuwdah Bar-Abba), and Silas (the shortened name of Silvanus) 76. So, after they deliver the Apostle s letter to the Ekklesia of Antioch in Syria, Sha uwl/paul and Barnabas stay in Antioch for a bit longer 77. After this, Sha uwl/paul then decides it would be good to visit the places he and Barnabas had gone on their previous journey 78. However, Barnabas wants to bring his cousin, John (Yahuchanon) Mark, along with them, but Sha uwl/paul disagrees, as John Mark had deserted them on their first journey 79. Unable to agree, Sha uwl/paul and Barnabas separate, with Barnabas sailing for Cyprus with John Mark 80, and Sha uwl/paul taking Silas, the representative from the Jerusalem elders, along with him through Syria and Cilicia 81. So, at the start of Sha uwl/paul s Second missionary journey, Sha uwl/paul and Silas return to Lystra and Derbe in Lycaonia, where Sha uwl/paul meets and befriends a half-jew half-greek man named Timothy, 69 Acts 14: Acts 14:18 71 Acts 14:19 72 Acts 14:20 73 Acts 14:21, 24, Acts 15:1-2a 75 Acts 15:2b 76 Acts 15: Acts 15: Acts 15:36 79 Acts 15: Acts 15:39 81 Acts 15:40-41

18 Galatians: A look at its Historical Reliability 13 whom he then circumcises and takes along with him on his journey 82. On their journey, they deliver to the members of the Ekklesia the same letter that they had received from the Jerusalem elders to deliver to those in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia. Sha uwl/paul, Silas and Timothy then travel in a north-western direction, making a pass-through the Phrygian-Galatian region (the name given to the left hand section of the Province of Galatia that was taken from the land of Phrygia. This is also the section where Antioch of Pisidia was situated 83 ), and coming to Mysia 84. They attempted to go into Bithynia, but were unable to, and so went to Troas, a city on the coast of North-West Asia minor 85. And so, on their first venture out of Asia, they sailed to Macedonia (the northern half of Greece), and visited the cities of Neopolis and Philippi 86. Within Philippi, Sha uwl/paul expels a demon from a servant girl, which greatly annoys her masters who drag Sha uwl/paul and Silas to the Rulers of the city, who have Sha uwl/paul and Silas beaten with rods, and then thrown into Philippi prison 87. However, during the night, an earthquake happens and manages to open all the gates of the prison s jails, therefore allowing the prisoners to escape. However, none of them escape, and instead stay within the walls, and so Sha uwl/paul saves the jailer from killing himself. The next day, Sha uwl/paul and Silas tell the rulers of Philippi that they have unlawfully beaten Roman citizens, which installs great fear within the city rulers. The city rulers are then forced to publically apologise to Sha uwl/paul and Silas, and then escort them out of the city 88. Sha uwl/paul and Silas then leave and arrive in Thessalonica, another major city of Macedonia 89. Again, Sha uwl/paul and Silas preaching causes them to be almost attacked, and so they are sent away to Berea, where they enjoy a bit more of a success 90. Nevertheless, some people in Berea are stirred up against Sha uwl/paul, and Sha uwl/paul again has to leave another city under an escort, but Silas and Timothy are left in Thessalonica 91. Sha uwl/paul then arrives in Athens, the most famous city in the land of Greece, where he preaches by himself for several days before he leaves for Corinth, the Capital of Achaia (the southern half of Greece) 92. Sha uwl/paul stays in 82 Acts 16: See The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 2, pp Acts 16:7a 85 Acts 16:7b-8 86 Acts 16: Acts 16: Acts 16:39 89 Acts 17:1 90 Acts 17:5, Acts 17: Acts 17:16-18:1

19 Galatians: A look at its Historical Reliability 14 Corinth for about eighteen months, until he is brought before the new Consul of Achaia - Gallio 93. However, Gallio is apathetic to anything brought against Sha uwl/paul, and asks Sha uwl/paul s opponents to leave his tribunal 94. However, Sha uwl/paul s opponents seize Sosthenes, the ruler of the Synagogue in Corinth, and beat him publically before Gallio s tribunal, to which Gallio is again, apathetic towards 95. After this, Sha uwl/paul decides to return to Syria, and takes along the Jewish husband-and-wife duo Priscilla and Aquila, who had been expelled from Rome along with the rest of the Jews by an edict of the Emperor Claudius 96. They come to Ephesus, a city in Asia Minor, where Sha uwl/paul leaves Priscilla and Aquila, and then sails to Caesarea 97. Sha uwl/paul then goes back to Antioch of Syria, and then from there again passes through the Phrygian-Galatian province, revisiting the Ekklesia s he had already been to previously 98. Sha uwl/paul then again returns to Ephesus, where Sha uwl/paul managed to annoy a man named Demetrius, who made silver images of the Greek goddess Artemis 99. After Demetrius managed to cause a riot to ensue, when it had been quietened down, Sha uwl/paul departs for Macedonia 100. Sha uwl/paul continues onto Greece 101, but before he can sail from Greece to Syria again, he is stopped by a group of Anti-Sha uwl/paul Jews, preventing him from doing so, and as a result Sha uwl/paul heads back through Macedonia 102. After staying for the Festival of Unleavened Bread in the Macedonian city of Philippi, Sha uwl/paul and his travelling companions head to Troas on the north-western coast of Asia Minor, where they stay for a whole week 103. Afterwards, Sha uwl/paul travels by land to Assos, another city on the coast of Asia Minor, and then embarks on a ship and sails to Mitylene 104. Sha uwl/paul and his companions then pass through Chios, Samos, and stayed for a bit Miletus where he awaits elders from the city of Ephesus 105. Sha uwl/paul then embarks on a short trip to the small islands on the Aegean Sea, south-west of the main coast of Asia Minor, stopping at Cos, Rhodes, Patara, bypassing Cyprus, and then coming to the city of Tsor in 93 Acts 18: Acts 18: Acts 18:17 96 Acts 18:18; 18:2 97 Acts 18:19, 22a 98 Acts 18: Acts 19:1, Acts 20:1 101 Acts 20:2 102 Acts 20:3 103 Acts 20:6 104 Acts 20: Acts 20:15, 17

20 Galatians: A look at its Historical Reliability 15 Syria 106. Leaving Tsor, Sha uwl/paul and his companions come to Ptolemais, a city of Phoenicia 107, and then they come to Caesarea, and stay a couple of days with Philip 108, one of the seven Hellenistic Jews appointed by the Apostles, one of which was Stephen, whom was stoned to death in Jerusalem 109. Sha uwl/paul and his associates finally come to Jerusalem 110. In Jerusalem, after a meeting with Ya qob and the elders of the Ekklesia there, Sha uwl/paul goes to the temple in Jerusalem and makes a sacrificial vow in accordance with Ya qob s instructions, and also pays for four other men to do the same 111. Before the days of the sacrificial vow are over with however, Sha uwl/paul is accused by some Jews of bringing Gentiles into the temple, even though he hadn t 112. This caused an uproar which resulted in Sha uwl/paul being taken out of the mob by the Roman Cohort of Jerusalem, and almost ushered into their guarded Barracks 113. Notwithstanding, Sha uwl/paul speaks to the Tribune, who allows Sha uwl/paul to speak to the crowd 114. However, Sha uwl/paul s speech doesn t go down well with the crowd, and the Tribune orders Sha uwl/paul to be taken into the barracks and flogged, unbeknown to the Tribune that Sha uwl/paul was a Roman Citizen 115. When the Tribune is informed that Sha uwl/paul is a Roman Citizen, he stops the soldiers from flogging Sha uwl/paul, and had Sha uwl/paul kept in the Barracks overnight 116. In spite of finding out that Sha uwl/paul was a Roman Citizen, the Tribune calls for the chief priests of the Jerusalem Temple and the Sanhedrin to gather, and Sha uwl/paul is allowed to speak with them 117. Upon finding out that he was talking to a mixture of Sadducees and Pharisees, Sha uwl/paul appeals to the Pharisees, stating that he is being examined for his belief in the resurrection of the dead, a belief that the Pharisees also shared, yet the Sadducees didn t 118. This caused yet another uproar, which resulted in Sha uwl/paul being taken again to the Roman barracks 119. Whilst Sha uwl/paul is in the Roman Barracks, a plot to kill him is created by a group of 40 men, who take their plan to the Sanhedrin and persuade 106 Acts 21: Acts 21:7 108 Acts 21:8 109 Acts 7: Acts 21: Acts 21: Acts 21: Acts 21: Acts 21: Acts 22: Acts 22: Acts 22: Acts 23:6 119 Acts 23:8-10