GALATIANS
338
OALATIANS
etc., a list is jjiveii of those who carried the collections
to Jerusalem. There are representatives from South
Galatia, Achaia, Macedonia, and Asia; but there is
no deputy from North Galatia — from the towns of
Ancyra, Pessituis, Tavium. The following went to
Jerusalem on this occasion, the majority probably
meeting at Corinth, St. Paul, St. Luke, and Sopater of
Berea (probably representing Philippi and Achaia;
see II Cor., viii, 18-22); Aristarchus and Secundus of
Macedonia; Gains of Derbe, and Timothy of Lystra
(S. Galatia); and Tychicus and Trophimus of Asia.
There is not a word about anybody from North Gala-
tia, the most probable rea.son being that St. Paul had
never been there (see Rendall, Expositor, 1893, vol.
II, p. 321).
{9) St. Paul, the Roman citizen, invariably employs the names of the Roman provinces, such as Achaia, Macedonia, Asia; and it is not probable that he de- parted from this practice in his u.se of "Galatia". The people of South CJalatia could with propriety be styled Galatians. Two of the towns, Antioch and Lystra, were Roman colonies; and the other two boasted of the Roman names, Claudio-Iconiimi, and Claudio-Derbe. " Galatians " was an honourable title when applied to them; but they would be insulted if they were called Phrygians or Lycaonians. All admit that St. Peter named the Roman provinces when he wrote " to the elect strangers dispensed through Pon- tus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia" (I Pet.,
(10) The manner in which St. Paul mentions St. Barnabas in the Epistle indicates that the latter was known to those for whom the Epistle was primarily intended. St. Barnabas had visited South Galatia with St. Paul (Acts, xiii, xiv), but he was unknown in North Galatia.
(11) St. Paul states (ii, 5) that the reason for his course of action at Jerusalem was " that the truth of the gospel miyht contitiuc with" the Galatians. This seems to imply that they were already converted. He had visited the southern part of the Galatian province before the council, but not the northern. The view favoured above receives confirmation from a consid- eration, as appended, of the persons addressed.
The Kind of People Addressed. — The country of South Galatia answers the conditions of the Epistle admirably; but this cannot be said of North Galatia. From the Epistle we gather that the majority were Gentile converts, that many were probably Jewish proselytes from their acquaintance with the Old Test- ament, that Jews who persecuted them from the first were living amongst them ; that St. Paul had visited them twice, and that the few Judaizers appeared amongst them only after his last visit. We know from Acts, xiii, xiv (and early history), that Jews were settled in South Galatia. During the first missionary journey unbelieving Jews made their presence felt everywhere. As soon as Paul and Barnabas returned to Syrian Antioch, some Jewish converts came from Judea and taught that circumcision was necessary for salvation (Acts, xv, 1). Paul and Barnabas opposed them, and went up to the council, where it was de- creed that circumcision and the Law of Moses were not necessary for the Gentiles ; but nothing was deter- mined as to the attitude of Jewish converts regarding these things. In Judea they continued to observe them, following the example of St. James, though it was implied in the decree that they were matters of in- difference. This was shown, soon after, by St. Peter's eating with the Gentiles. On his withdraw- ing from tlii-Mi, and when many others followed his example, St. I'aul pujijicly vin<licated the equality of the Gentile Clirisliiins. 'I'ho majority agreed; but there must have been "f:ilsc brclliren" amongst them (Gal., ii, 4) who were Christians only in name, and who hated St. Paul. Some of these, in all probability, followed him to South Galatia, soon after his second
visit. But they could no longer teach the necessity of
circumcision, as the Apostolic decrees had been al-
ready delivered there by St. Paul (Acts, xvi, 4).
These decrees are not mentioned in the Epistle be-
cause they did not settle the point now insisted on by
the Judaizers, viz. the advisability of the Galatians
accepting circumcision and the Law of Moses, for their
greater perjection. On the other hand, there is no evi-
dence that there were any Jews settled at this time in
North Galatia (see Ramsay, St. Paul The Traveller).
It was not the kind of country to attract them. The
Gauls were a dominant class, living in castles, and
leading a half pastoral, half nomadic life, and speaking
their own Gallic language. The country was very
sparsely populated by the subjugated agricultural
inhabitants. During the long winter the ground was
covered with snow; in simimer the heat was intense
and the ground parched ; and one might travel many
miles without meeting a human being. There were
some fertile tracts; but the greater part was either
poor pasture land, or barren undulating hilly ground.
The bulk of the inhabitants in the few towns were not
Gauls. Trade was small, and that mainly in wool.
A decree of Augustus in favour of Jews was supposed
to be framed for those at Ancyra, in Galatia. It is
now known that it was addressed to quite a different
region.
Why WRnTE>f. — The Epistle was written to coun- teract the influence of a few Judaizers who had come amongst the Galatians, and were endeavouring to persuade them that in order to be perfect Christians it was necessary to be circumcised and observe the Law of Moses. Their argiunents were sufficiently specious to puzzle the Galatians, and their object was likely to gain the approval of unbelieving Jews. They said that what St. Paul taught was good as far as it went; but that he had not taught the full perfection of Christianity. And this was not surprising, as he was not one of the great Apostles who had been taught by t'hrist Himself, and received their commission from Him. Whatever St. Paul knew he learned from others, and he had received his commission to preach not from Christ, but from men at Antioch (Acts, xiii). Circumcision and the Law, it is true, were not neces- sary to salvation; but they were essential to the full perfection of Christianity. This was proved by the example of St. James, of the other Apostles, and of the first disciples, at Jerusalem. On this very point this Paul, the Apostle, placed himself in direct opposition to Cephas, the Prince of the Apostles, at Antioch. His own action in circumcising Timothy showed what he expected of a personal companion, and he was now probably teaching the good of circumcision in other places. These statements puzzled the Galatians, and made them waver. They felt aggrieved that he had left them, as they thought, in an inferior position; they began to observe Jewish festivals, but they had not yet accepted circumcision. The Apostle refutes these arguments so effectively that the question never again arose. Henceforth his enemies confined them- selves to personal attacks (see II Cor.).
CoNTENT.s OF THE EpiSTLE. — The six chapters nat- urally fall into three divisions, consisting of two chap- ters each. (1) In the first two chapters, after the general introduction, he shows that he is an Apostle not from men, nor through the teaching of any man, but from Christ; and the gospel he taught is in har- mony with the teaching of the great Apostles, who gave him the right hand of fellowship. (2) He next (iii, iv) shows the inefficacy of circiunci.sion and the Law, and that we owe our redemption to Christ alone. He appeals to the experience of the ( lalatian converts, and brings forward proofs from Scripture. (3) He exhorts them (v, vi) not to abuse their freedom from the Law to indulge in crimes, "for they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God". It is not for love of them, he admonishes, that (h<' Judai-
