AN ELUCIDATION OF GALATIANS

AN ELUCIDATION OF GALATIANS

Introduction

Compared to other epistles, the questions surrounding the epistle to the Galatians are relatively easy. Paul’s authorship is “indisputable” (Kummel, 304). His intended audience is the churches of Galatia (1:2) whose recipients he called “Galatians” (3:2). The primary contentious question concerns whether this audience is comprised of “ethnic Galatians in the north of the province or southerners of various races who were included in the Roman province” (Carson, 290). The arguments (cf. Carson, 292; Constable, 1) in favor of North Galatia include: 1) the term “Galatia” usually referred to the North, inhabited by Gauls; 2) Luke normally referred to geographical areas rather than provinces; 3) similarity to the term Paul used and the Gallic inhabitants of North Galatia; 4) Paul traveled through the north on his second missionary journey (Acts 16:6-8). The arguments in favor of South Galatia are: 1) Acts 16:6 and 18:23 do not support the idea of Paul’s travel to the north; 2) there is no specific information about the northern churches in the book of Acts; 3) it is improbable Paul visited the north due to its geographic isolation, particularly if 4:13 refers to an illness; 4) Paul normally uses Roman provincial names; 5) The three occurrences of Barnabas’ name suggest that he was known by the readers. A number of other arguments have been presented in favor of or against each case, but Southern Galatia appears the more likely on the basis of stronger arguments (though admittedly none is ironclad).

The date of the epistle is dependent upon the answer to the audience. If the Southern Galatian theory is correct then an early date is possible (Carson, 293; Constable, 2; Bruce, 301). The Southern Galatian theory is supported by at least four arguments: 1) Paul’s mention of his contacts with the apostles (1:18; 2:1-2) probably correspond to the visits in Acts 9:26 and 11:28-30; 2) the lack of mention of the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) – an occurrence that would have buttressed his argument – suggests it had not yet occurred; 3) Peter’s withdrawal of fellowship from Gentiles is more likely before than after the council; 4) the early date is not ruled out by Gal. 4:13. Those who hold to the Northern Galatian theory suggest a later date (Klijn, 94; Lightfoot, 51) by invoking the following arguments: 1) the style is similar to Romans and Corinthians and thus should be dated contemporarily with them; 2) the opinion that Galatians 2 and Acts 15 are separate accounts of the same visit; 3) Paul has already visited Galatia twice; 4) Galatians fits into the sequence between the persecution of 2 Corinthians and the lack thereof in Romans. The arguments appear stronger for the Southern Galatia theory based on three factors. First, similarity of style does not automatically denote date of authorship. Secondly, this entire view is dependent upon a questionable hypothesis, namely the same visit accounting for both Galatians 2 and Acts 15. Such is possible but not the most probable due to the lack of explicit mention of the Council. Finally, the sequence argument is completely arbitrary. Though dogmatism is again impossible, the Southern Galatian theory is more likely.

Just as the audience and date are dependent upon one another, so too are the date and the purpose for writing. Assuming the Southern Galatian audience and an early date, Paul wrote this epistle to address a burgeoning Judaizing heresy that he repeatedly references throughout the letter. Who were these Judaizers? They appear to have been Jews who claimed to be Christians but wanted Christians to submit to the Mosaic Law (Constable, 2).

Outline

I.                   Introduction (1:1-10)

A.    Salutation (1:1-5)

B.     Denunciation (1:6-10)

II.                Paul’s Defense of His Gospel (1:11-2:21)

A.    Declared (1:11-12)

B.     Distinct from other apostles (1:13-24)

C.     Dependent upon other apostles (2:1-10)

D.    Discipline of another apostle (2:11-21)

1.      Peter’s hypocrisy (2:11-13)

2.      Paul’s rebuke (2:14)

3.      Principle (2:15-21)

III.             Paul’s defense of justification by faith alone (3:1-4:31)

A.    Vindication of justification by faith alone (3:1-18)

1.      By Galatian experience (3:1-5)

2.      By Abraham (3:6-14)

3.      By the eternal promise (3:15-18)

B.     Purpose of the Law (3:19-26)

C.     Heirs and Sons (3:27-4:6)

D.    Concerning Justification by faith (4:8-20)

E.     Two Covenants (4:21-31)

IV.             A Defense of Christian Liberty (5:1-26)

A.    Liberty and the Law (5:1-12)

B.     The Law versus License (5:13-26)

1.      The fruit of license (5:13-21)

2.      The fruit of the Spirit (5:22-26)

V.                Responsibilities of the Walk of Love (6:1-10)

A.    Restoring The Sinner (6:1-6)

B.     Reaping The Sown Seed (6:7-10)

VI.             Conclusion (6:11-18)

EXPOSITION

I. Introduction (1:1-10)

Paul begins with a brief salutation followed by a condemnation of his audience. This opening is rare in Paul’s epistles.

1. Salutation (1:1-5)

1.1   Paul begins by declaring his apostleship and noting that the source of that apostolic authority is not determined by men but through the risen Savior, Jesus Christ, and God the Father.

1.2   Paul also mentions “all the brethren who are with me.” These brethren remain unnamed although Barnabas may be part of this group. He addresses this epistle to the churches of Galatia. This is the only Pauline epistle not addressed to Christians in a specific town or a specific individual. (See “Introduction” for the most likely audience).

1.3-5 As with most of his other epistles, Paul opens with greetings of “grace” and “peace” followed by a brief mention of an aspect of the Lord’s atonement. He notes that Jesus Christ gave Himself for our sins so that He would deliver believers from the present evil age. This is a reference to the Lord’s sacrificial death on the cross. Note that both forgiveness of sins and deliverance are mentioned. These concepts become important in the forthcoming denunciation. Paul further notes that this is “the will of our God and Father.” Paul declares glory unto God forever and ends the salutation with “Amen.”

2. Denunciation (1:6-10)

1.6 Paul then launches into a denunciation of certain members of his audience. He states his disappointment that they are “turning away” (NKJV) from Jesus to a different gospel. The term for “turning away,” metatiqhmi, occurs six times (Kubo, 175) in the New Testament. This is the only occurrence of this word in all of Paul’s writings (assuming Paul did not write Hebrews). The word is used to note desertion or “to have a change of mind in allegiance” (BDAG, 642c). It is probably best to understand the denunciation towards individual members of the churches of Galatia rather than to assume a universal apostasy within the church. They have turned away from Jesus to “a different gospel.” This gospel is referred to by the term e’teron, the word translated “heresy.” These Galatians had turned from the true gospel to a false gospel, which was really no gospel at all.

1.7-10 Paul then draws his line in the sand by declaring there is no such thing as “another gospel” (in the literal sense); there is only the perversion of the gospel of Christ. Some false teachers are confusing the Galatians. Then comes the strongest denunciation from Paul in all of his epistles: if Paul or angel from heaven should declare a “gospel” contrary to the gospel previously proclaimed by Paul, that person is to be anaqema. So strong is the denunciation that Paul repeats it again in verse nine. A subtle shift occurs from the subjunctive mood in verse 8 (indicating possibility) to the indicative in verse 9 (indicating actuality). The NIV translates it “let him be eternally condemned.” Whether this refers to judgment in Hell or just accursed is difficult to ascertain. Nevertheless, Paul makes clear that the teacher of a false gospel is accursed even if that teacher is Paul, his companions, or an angel from heaven. Paul ends the brief opening by noting that he is a bondservant of Christ and does not seek to please men.

II. Paul’s Defense of His Apostleship (1:11-2:14)

Paul’s defense of his gospel begins with a defense of his apostleship. He briefly noted his position in the salutation, but he now develops the concept further.

A. Declared (1:11-12)

1.11-12 Paul refers to his audience as “brethren.” This suggests they are believers, making the “curse” as a reference to eternal condemnation more unlikely. He states that the gospel he preached finds it source not in man but in the revelation of Jesus Christ to him.

B. Distinct from the other apostles (1:13-24)

1.13-14 Paul references his past in Judaism as a persecutor of the church of God. He also notes his own personal advancement beyond many of his contemporaries as a product of his zeal for the tradition of his fathers in the Jewish faith.

1.15-17 He then contrasts his tradition ruled religion with his calling by God. He notes that his separation for a call unto grace occurred from the time he was in his mother’s womb (e.g. before his birth). This concept is common in the OT in regards to prophets who were set aside for service before birth (Isa. 49:1-6; Jer. 1:5). God took the first step and called Paul through grace. This involved the revealing of Jesus to Paul in order than Paul would preach to the Gentiles. Upon the manifestation of this calling written by Luke (Acts 9:1-19), Paul notes that he did not check with other men to validate his experience. Rather than head straight for Jerusalem, he went to Arabia and then back to Damascus.

1.18-20 After a three year gap, Paul goes to Jerusalem, where he meets the Apostle Peter. He stays with Peter for 15 days during which time he sees only one other apostle, James. This James explicitly refers to the James who was the half-brother of the Lord Jesus. Paul then includes the parenthetical statement that he is not lying about his experiences.

1.21-24 After the experiences and travels elucidated in vv. 17-20, Paul then travels to Syria and Cilicia. It appears that his reputation preceded him and that he was perhaps known by the churches of Judea, but they did not know what he looked like. The churches in Judea heard that the persecutor was now a faithful preacher of the faith. They believed the report they heard, and they glorified God for that report.

C. Inter-Dependent upon other apostles (2:1-10)

2:1 The chapter break is in an odd place here. Paul continues his testimony of apostleship by noting a return trip to Jerusalem that he took with Barnabas. This trip occurred after an interval of fourteen years. It appears most likely that the fourteen-year interval refers to the time from his conversion to his return trip (Acts 11:27-30) rather than from his initial sojourn to Jerusalem (Acts 9:26-30; Gal. 1:18-20). Titus also accompanied Paul on this particular trip.

2:2-5 Paul tells that his reason for this second trip is in response to a revelation. The nature of this revelation (vision, prophecy, message) is not spelled out. This meeting occurred privately. In this meeting with the other apostles, Paul spelled out the gospel he was proclaiming to the Gentiles. It is unlikely he did this because of uncertainty of the gospel; after all, he had just declared his gospel to be the true one (1:6-9). It seems most probable that his critics might attack his work because of his lack of public association with the apostles in Jerusalem. Rumormongers might suggest that Paul was a loose cannon answerable to nobody.

Paul then began laying the foundation of his argument to reject the necessity of circumcision. He noted that his companion Titus, himself a Greek, was not ordered to be circumcised by Paul or the other apostles. There was no suggestion or compulsion that this necessity prevented Titus’ salvation. Paul then makes a parenthetical statement: non-Christians posing as Christians (false brothers) were secretly spying on Paul’s teaching about our freedom in Christ (Fung, 94). They did this so as to enslave the Christians. What they would be enslaved to is not stated but the suggestion is enslavement to the Old Testament law. Paul further declares that at no time did they submit to these false brothers. Instead, they refused to be enslaved so that the truth of the gospel would continue among the Galatians.

2:6-9 Paul notes both the similarity of ministry (apostle) and the differences of intended audience, the Jews for the other apostles and the Gentiles for Paul. The message is the same but the recipient is different. He also explicitly notes the names of the three most prominent apostles: Peter, James, and John. His reference to these apostles comes across as harsh, but the intent is that they are in no way superior to him. All apostles have equal authority, and all (true) apostles have the same message; the difference is found in the audience. Paul notes that the prominent apostles had validated both he and Barnabas by extending “the right hand of fellowship.” The grace given to Paul refers to his apostolic ministry to the Gentiles (Constable, 18).

2:10 The only reminder given Paul by the other apostles was to “remember the poor.”

D. Discipline of another apostle (2:11-14)

2:11 Paul now mentions an incident where he had corrected the apostle perceived as most prominent, Peter. This is the opposite reaction of Peter extending his hand for fellowship. Paul confronted Peter’s hypocrisy face-to-face rather than gossiping about him.

2:12-13 This incident is not recorded in the Scriptures except here. We do not know the time frame. The incident is straightforward: some friends of the Apostle James visited him and upon this visit he discontinued his prior practice of public eating with the Gentiles. Peter’s reason is expressed by Paul: fear of those who espoused the necessity of circumcision. The phrase “from James” should not be taken to suggest James endorsed their views (cf. 2:9) or sent them. We are not told the nature of this relationship. But their arrival caused both Peter and Barnabas to withdraw from public association with the Gentiles, a blatant act of hypocrisy.

2:14 Paul makes his public rebuke of Peter (and implicitly Barnabas) clear. This situation involves competing ethics. Paul did not follow the procedure outlined in Matthew 18:15-17. And perhaps Peter was attempting to not violate the conscience of those he perceived as weaker brothers. Such situations are often difficult to navigate. But Paul saw their behavior as potentially schismatic, creating a Jewish and a Gentile Christianity and violating the truth of the gospel.

E.Describing The Principle (2:15-21)

Paul now sets faith and works of the law in antithesis to one another much like his description of the same concepts in Romans 3:21-6:23.

2:15-21 Paul intersperses doctrine with indirect discourse, an imaginary conversation that covers the main teachings and most prominent objections. Man is justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the Law. The common objection to this teaching of “faith alone” is that such a teaching means a person can do anything he wants to afterwards without consequence. Those who advocate works in addition to faith suggest that without works lawless behavior is an inevitable consequence. Paul debunks this notion, noting that the purpose of the Law is to show to man that he is a sinner rather than serve as a means of justification. Paul caps his argument by noting that if man could be justified through the Law then the death of Christ was completely unnecessary.

III. Paul’s defense of justification by faith alone (3:1-4:31)

Having just separated faith from works in his brief discussion of justification, Paul further develops the argument: not only is justification by faith without works, it is by faith plus nothing else. Paul’s tone at this point turns from reflective to polemic as he asks a number of rhetorical questions.

A.    Vindication of justification by faith alone (3:1-18)

1.      By Galatian experience (3:1-5)

3:1-5 Paul calls the Galatians “foolish” and asks them whether their reception of the Spirit of God was by faith or by works. He repeats the question for emphasis (v 5).

2.      By Abraham (3:6-14)

3.6-14 transitioning his repeated rhetorical question, Paul answers it with an appeal to the greatest Jewish father of all, Abraham. He notes simply that Abraham believed God, which was counted him as righteousness. The sons of Abraham, in fulfillment of God’s promise, are those who have faith. Paul then states a curse is upon those who rely upon works to be justified (Deut. 27:26). He is making the truth self-evident: everyone who does not keep the whole Law is under a curse, and nobody keeps the whole Law. But this bad news is not the end because Christ became a curse and by becoming a curse, Christ redeemed those who believe from the curse of the Law. He further reiterates that the just shall live by faith (Hab. 2:4). This quote shows that justification by faith alone has always been the divine plan, even in the Old Testament. Paul again appeals to Old Testament language by noting that the one who dies on a tree is cursed. This is a reference to Deut. 21:23 with the application looking towards the crucifixion. In short, Christ became a curse so that the blessing of Abraham could be poured out on the Gentiles.

3.      By the eternal promise (3:15-18)

3.15-18 After appealing first to the Galatians themselves and then to Abraham, Paul now appeals to the integrity of the promise of God. He puts God’s promise to Abraham in opposition to inheritance occurring by keeping the Law. The law does not supersede the promise; it ratifies it.

B.     Purpose of the Law (3:19-25)

3.19 Why then does one need the Law? Paul gives a short list of reasons that denote multiple purposes of the law. The first reason is it was added because of transgressions for a period of time – until the Seed came to whom the promise was made This is a reference to Jesus Christ. There are at least four possible interpretations of the purpose of the Law: 1) to restrain transgressions (Lull, JBL, 482); 2) to reveal transgressions; 3) to provoke transgressions; 4) to make one aware of one’s own transgressions. The fourth option seems least likely because it violates the context while the second option appears to be the most in accordance with the synthetic hermeneutic principle (cf. Rom. 3:20, 4:15, 5:13).

3.20 This passage has been the subject of some debate. The most likely interpretation is that a mediator is only necessary when there are two parties; God alone can hand down a unilateral covenant that does not require a mediator.

3.21-25 Paul continues answering questions from an imaginary objector. Is the law against God’s promises? No, because if a law could have given life then the law would have served that purpose. This is the second purpose listed in this brief section. Scripture teaches us that all are under sin but that the promise (of justification) is given to those who have faith in Christ. Consequently, the law serves a third purpose: it functions as a tutor to bring us to Christ so that we may receive justification by faith. After we have possessed faith in Christ, the necessity of a tutor is removed.

C. Heirs and Sons (3:26-4:7)

3.26 Leaving the law behind as a tutor, Paul continues his exposition on faith. It is through faith that one is a son of Jesus Christ.

3:27 Paul notes that as many as were baptized into Christ have “put on” Christ. How should this passage be viewed? Church of Christ advocates insist this refers to water baptism (Coffman, ). This refers to the baptizing work by the Holy Spirit where the believer is placed in Christ upon conversion (1 Cor. 12:13; Mk. 1:8).

3:28 Paul now shows that distinctions are not drawn when it comes to a believer. Whether one is a Jew or Gentile, male or female, the believer is equal to all others in Christ Jesus. This passage has been erroneously used by those who espouse female headship (cf. ). But this passage is referring to inheritance on the basis of faith and does not address the issue of headship. (Those issues are addressed in 1 Cor. 11 and 1 Tim. 3).

3:29-4:7 Paul now makes a sequence argument: if you are Christ’s then you are Abraham’s seed. If you are Abraham’s seed then you are an heir according to God’s promise (Gen. 15:6; Rom. 4:11). Paul then begins a brief discussion of what it means to be an heir of Christ. Having used the analogy of a child’s natural maturity (3:24-26), Paul now shows that there is a difference between a child and a slave.  The outward appearance of both an heir and a slave is the same while each is a child. A child cannot make his own decisions but is cared for by guardians until a time appointed by the father. This would have been understood by both the Jews (who used the bar mitzvah to denote maturity) and the Gentiles (the Romans used the toga virilis). Paul is continuing his reference to the Law. Having shown the law to be a caretaker and tutor, he now presents it as a temporary master until “the fullness of time” had come. This is clearly referenced as God sending forth Jesus as the Redeemer of those who were under the law. As proof of that inheritance, God sent forth the Holy Spirit into the hearts of the adopted Sons. Consequently, the believer is no longer a slave but a son and inevitably an heir of God.

A.    Concerning Justification by faith (4:8-31)

Paul now begins a series of contrasts between their current professions of faith and their lives prior to justification.

4.8 Paul notes the religious nature of all men. When they were lost, they did not know God so they served idols that by nature were not gods.

4.9-11 Paul now asks a rhetorical question: after knowing God, why would they desire to return to their bondage? He even gives as an example their observation of certain days and weeks, a reference to religious ceremonies and festivals given in the OT but never required from the church by God (MacArthur, 1795). I should note here that Paul himself observed some Jewish customs after his conversion (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor. 16:8). However, these were voluntary and not presented as necessary for salvation. Their observation of certain days reeked of legalism, an aspect that frightened Paul (4:11).

4.12 Paul urges the Galatians to become like him, abandoning efforts to be saved by works and to simply trust by faith. But he has a positive observation: the Galatians had not injured him. This is probably a reference to the lack of persecution of Paul by the Galatians themselves.

4.13 Paul declares that he preached the gospel because of physical infirmity. The nature of this infirmity is not stated although an implication may be drawn from v. 14.

4.14-16 Paul also acknowledges their acceptance of him despite his physical infirmity. They received him as if he had been Jesus! He then acknowledges that they would have been willing to give one of their own eyes to him. Whether this is referring to a specific ophthalmic disease or to be viewed as hyperbole is difficult to determine. All such attempts are speculation without evidence. The emphasis of the passage is not upon the nature of the illness but upon how much the Galatians loved and accepted Paul despite this infirmity. Paul then presses his advantage by playing upon that love and acceptance of him with a strongly worded rhetorical question: “Have I become your enemy because I tell you the truth?” He was telling the truth in regards to their spiritual status.

4.17-20 Paul transitions from a question about whether he is an enemy to their real enemies, the Judaizers, the propagators of the false gospel (cf. 1:6-9). These Judaizers seek them zealously but not for a good reason. This is similar to the practices of modern-day cults, who seek out members under the guise of “really caring” for their needs when the ultimate motive is the advancement of the political/social/theological agenda of the group. The Judaizers likewise sought these Christians but not due to concern for their souls; it was so they could exclude them from the group and thus make them jealous of the group. Misery loves company and never more so than in works-righteousness religion. Paul wants them zealous for the truth and not only when he is there but even more so when he is not. He then expresses his desire to be with them.

E. Two Covenants (4:21-31)

Paul now inserts yet another discussion regarding the Law.

4.21-31 confronting them with their own inabilities to follow the Law – a fact he has already established – Paul now asks them why they would like to be under the Law. He then notes that two sons were borne of Abraham, one by the concubine that is a child of bondage, and one child of promise, Isaac. Much of the persecution of the sons according to the promise finds it root in those who are sons according to the flesh (e.g. sons of Ishmael). This has always been true (4:29). Paul then quotes from Gen. 21:10 to show that those who are trying to be justified by the Law will be cast out of God’s presence forever.

IV. A Defense of Christian Liberty (5:1-6:10)

Having established the true gospel of justification by faith alone, Paul now moves from the orthodoxy to orthopraxy. Invariably the question will arise as to what obligations the Christian has if he is saved by faith apart from works. Paul now tackles such questions and notes the relationship of the law to grace.

A.    The Law And Liberty (5:1-12)

5.1-3 Paul now commands the Galatians to stand fast in the liberty they have in the freedom Christ has given them. After lo these many verses Paul spells it out explicitly: if you are circumcised then Christ will not be of any use to you. He is spelling out that they should not be circumcised in order to be justified. As he has repeatedly stated, justification is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. The one who is circumcised for his justification indebts himself to keep the whole law, an impossibility.

5.4 Those who attempt to be justified by the law have become separated from Christ. They have “fallen from grace.” This phrase has become a popular way to say that a believer has lost his salvation, and a number of Christians believe that is precisely how it should be interpreted. Ironically, most people who believe a Christian can lose his salvation believe that a person is saved by faith (perhaps alone, perhaps not) but maintains salvation by doing works. This passage boomerangs on those who would teach such a notion. To say they “fell from grace” is not to say “they were in grace but fell out of it.” It is rather to say that they fell beyond the reach of the gospel of grace because they insisted upon doing works to be saved. Grace and works are mutually exclusive concepts. A salvation that is 99% grace and 1% works is not biblical salvation by grace. To fall from grace is to fall beyond its reach, not to fall out of a saving grace.

5.5-6 Paul now transitions from “you” to “we,” possibly noting a change in who is being addressed. The believers await the hope (e.g. the ultimate fulfillment) of righteousness by faith. This is found in Christ, where circumcision makes no difference as to status. Once again Paul notes the importance of faith.

5.7-10 Paul now goes back to “you,” noting they “ran well” but that someone has hindered them from obeying the truth. Paul notes that it is not God who does this. He then gives one of the best-known proverbs of the NT: “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.” Leaven was often used in Scripture to note the pervasive power of sin (cf. 1 Cor. 5:6, Mt. 16:6, 12). Just a tiny bit of leaven is enough to make the entire amount of dough rise. Likewise, one small sin erupts into major disobedience. But Paul also expresses confidence both in the Galatians and in the Lord that they will only have the mind of Christ.

5.11-12 Paul then ponders a painful aspect to his ministry: since he does not preach circumcision why is he persecuted? This suggests that a false story had circulated that Paul really did preach circumcision. He notes that if this is true then his persecution by the Judaizers makes no sense whatsoever. And he once again transitions to talk about the cross, noting it is a stumbling block. Rhetorically he notes that if he taught this circumcision then the stumbling block of the cross was removed. Some of Paul’s harshest rhetoric followed when he stated that he wished those troubling the Galatians would mutilate themselves. His term suggests castration, and it may refer to the cult of Cybele.

B. The Law versus License (5:13-26)

Paul now wants to ensure that though the believer is redeemed, he should not turn his freedom into a license to sin. This objection is commonly made by those who oppose the gospel of grace.

                       

1. The fruit of license (5:13-21)

5.13-15 Paul now notes the major reason for one’s freedom in Christ. Liberty is not given to the Christian so as to indulge his sinful nature but rather it is given so that the believer will serve his fellow believers. Paul now shows a solid relationship between the Law and faith when he declares the Law is fulfilled in one statement, “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Noting the normal human tendency to quarrel, Paul warns them to not devour one another with their own selfishness.

5.16-18 Paul gives the Galatians a command to walk in the Spirit. The twin side of this same coin is to not carry out the desires of the flesh, which are the opposite of being led by the Spirit. If a believer is led by the Spirit, he is not under the Law.

5.19-21 Paul now gives the Galatians a list of deeds of the flesh that will show them when they are not walking in the Spirit. This list includes a variety of sins ranging from immorality to sorcery and drunkenness. Paul states that those who practice such sins shall not inherit the kingdom of God. There are two prominent interpretations as to what that means. The first is that those who engage in such sins demonstrate irrefutably that they are unbelievers. In this view “inherit the kingdom of God” is equated with having eternal life. This is the predominant Christian view (Bruce, 250; Boice, 497; MacArthur, 162; McDonald, 710; Plummer, 424; Luce, 204). This does not mean one sin negates salvation since it refers to those who “practice” such things (e.g. a pattern of lifestyle). A minority view (Free Grace theology) sees this as saying that Christians who practice such things will receive less inheritance in the millennial kingdom, being able to “enter” the kingdom but not “inherit” it (Hodges, 76; Dillow, 90; Wilkin, GNTC, 850; 2003: 129-30). The problem with this view is that “inheriting the kingdom of God” was, in fact, synonymous with eternal life as research of the Old Testament (cf. Dan. 12:2; Ps. 37:9,11,18), New Testament (the verb klhronomhw is defined in terms of “Messianic salvation,” BDAG, 547, 2), Apocrypha (cf. 2 Macc. 7:1-9), Pseudepigrapha (1 Enoch 37:4; 40:9; 58:3; Ps. Sol. 3:12; 12:6, 14:9), and Dead Sea Scrolls (4 Mac. 15:3; 1 QS 4.7; 4Q181 1.4) shows. The predominant view is therefore most likely.

Those who belong to Jesus have crucified the flesh and its desires. Consequently, their lives are not marked by a sinful lifestyle, and they walk by the Spirit.

2.      The fruit of the Spirit (5:22-26)

5.22-26 Nine fruits are listed that are borne by those who walk by the Spirit. The list is not exhaustive nor does every Christian bear the same abundance of the same fruit. But the Christian’s life is marked by these fruits as proof of genuine regeneration.

V.    Responsibilities of the Walk of Love (6:1-10)

Having spelled out what it means to walk in the Spirit as opposed to the flesh, Paul now takes the individual fruits and gives them specific application towards another.

A. Restoring The Sinner (6:1-6)

6.1-6 Paul then tells the brothers how to restore a sinning brother. The Christian must look upon the fallen one with gentleness yet at the same time not be tempted to engage in sin himself. One way to do this is to bear the burdens of your brothers. Doing so will fulfill the law of Christ. Simultaneously, Paul reminds the reader to not be prideful by thinking higher of himself than he should.

B. Reaping The Sown Seed (6:7-10)

Paul now teaches a principle that reiterates his prior antithesis of flesh and Spirit. Following his command to not be prideful, he drives the point home by telling the reader to not be deceived. Whatever a man sows, he will reap. This is an agricultural analogy. A farmer who plants corn will not reap cotton from his sowing of corn. To do so he must plant cotton. Likewise, any person who sows to the flesh will reap the fruit of the flesh, which is corruption while the one who sows to the Spirit will reap eternal life. Paul then calls for perseverance in reaping. While alive the believer should be good to all people; however, he should especially take care of other brothers. This is not set in opposition to the Lord’s command to love our enemies (cf. Mt. 5:48). It is simply a reminder to take care of all but show special attention to your brothers just as you would take care of your own earthly family in a different way than you would another family.

VI. Conclusion (6:11-18)

Paul finishes with a final blast at the Judaizers who have been the target of his rhetorical wrath throughout the letter. He appeals to the vanity of the Galatians by noting the false teachers only want the Galatians circumcised so as to enjoy a feeling of superiority over them in the flesh. Paul reminds them that the Judaizers are under obligation to keep the entire Law because of their circumcision and yet none does it. He then compares their own boasting in the flesh with his own unwillingness to boast. Paul will only boast in the cross of Christ that crucified the world unto him. It also crucified him unto the world.

He then closes with a brief benediction by calling for peace and mercy upon all believers, both Jew and Gentile. Finally, he wishes that the grace of the Lord would be with the reader.

Bibliography

Bauer, Walter and Danker, F.W. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Boice, James Montgomery. "Galatians." In Romans-Galatians. Vol. 10 of The Expositor's Bible                    Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids:                         Zondervan Publishing House, 1976.

Bruce, F.F. Commentary on Galatians. NIGCT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.

Carson, D.A. and Moo, Douglas. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids:    Zondervan, 1992.

Constable, Thomas. "Galatians," class notes. Dallas: Dallas Theological Seminary, Fall       2010.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle

            Publishing Co., 1992.

Fung, Ronald Y.K. The Epistle to the Galatians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

Hodges, Zane C. Absolutely Free! A Biblical Reply to Lordship Salvation. Dallas:

            Redencion Viva, and Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie

            Books, 1989.

Hodges, Zane C. The Gospel Under Siege. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

Hodges, Zane C. Grace in Eclipse. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1985.

Kummel. The Recovery of Paul's Letter to the Galatians. London: SPCK, 1972.

Lightfoot, J.B. Saint Paul's Epistle to the Galatians. London: Macmillan, 1902.

Lull, David J. "'The Law Was Our Pedagogue': A Study of Galatians 3:19-25." Journal of

Biblical Literature 105:3 (September 1986):481-98.

MacArthur, John. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Galatians. Chicago: Moody, 1987.

McDonald, William. The Bible Believer's Commentary: The New Testament. Dallas: Thomas Nelson, 1990.

Robertson, A. T. Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. 4. Nashville: Broadman, 1931.

Smith, Kevin A. "What Does the Bbile Say About Women Preachers,"Internet www.circlofchristianwomen.com/women_pastors.htm. Accessed 27 November 2010.

Wallace, Daniel. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.

Wilkin, Bob. "Galatians 5:19-21: Who Will Inherit the Kingdom?" Grace Evangelical

Society Newsletter (December 1987), p. 2.

Wilkin, Robert N. The Grace New Testament Commentary, vol. 2: Romans-Revelation. Denton: GES, 2009.