Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS

 CHAPTER THREE (Lesson IX)

C. I. Scofield (1843-1921), American theologian, minister, writer, and author of the Scofield Reference Bible, tells us that the Spirit is shown in Galatians in a marvelous way. Paul says here in verse two He is received by the hearing of faith. When the Galatians believed they received the Spirit. To what end? The legalists give it little importance. Though they talk much of “power” in connection with the Spirit, it really is the power for service which chiefly needs their attention. Of God’s sovereign rights, of His blessed empowering the spiritual life, there is little worry. But it is precisely there that the Biblical emphasis falls. In Romans, for example, the Spirit is not even mentioned until we have a justified sinner trying to keep the law, utterly defeated in that attempt by the flesh, the “law in his members,” and crying out, not for help, but for deliverance.[1] Then the Spirit is brought within, Oh, what marvelous results![2]

George B. Stevens (1854-1906) agrees with Professor Lightfoot that “active hearing” is necessary for faith to be activated in receiving the Spirit for salvation. This is then contrasted with doing the works of the Law and hearing by faith what good works believers should do as God’s children.  It is a difference between the principles of hearing and the methods of doing. In the end, we could say that “hearing” is no more effective than “doing.” Stevens says that God is not asking for “favors” but for “faith.” But faith is just as much a thing of action as is doing. Faith leads to works done out of gratitude, not an obligation. Remember, the Messiah did not die on the cross out of obligation, but out of love.[3]

Says Benjamin W. Bacon (1860-1932), Paul knows that he can “rest his case” on this single issue. He did so with complete success at Jerusalem.[4] There was no escape from it; for the mother church itself dated its own foundation on the Day of Pentecost. The fundamental confession which made Christianity a true religion was: “Jesus is Lord.” It rested upon Moses’ experience on Mount Horeb, and among the Ephesians.[5] as its proof. Jewish messianism anticipated the “outpouring of the Spirit” in the last days as the token of the Redeemer’s return. For “legalists,” this was the spirit of obedience to the law; for the “wisdom writers,” it is the spirit of wisdom; for “prophecy advocates,” the spirit of prophecy.[6] The appearance of these “gifts of the Spirit” upon “faith in the Anointed One Jesus,” including the “signs and wonders”[7] was the proof on which the Church itself rested its assurance that “God made this Jesus … both Lord and Messiah.” If the Gentiles also had “the gifts of the Spirit” there was no more to be said. The only point to be made clear was when the gifts came, that is, not upon this attempt to supplement their justification in Grace with works of the Law, but before it, at the time of their hearing of faith.[8]

Arno C. Gaebelein (1861-1945), a Methodist minister in the United States, and a prominent teacher and conference speaker noted that as Christians, the Galatians possessed the Holy Spirit, as all true Christians receive Him and are sealed by the Spirit. They also enjoyed the ministry of the Spirit through the different gifts. And now he asks the question “Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by your faith upon hearing the Gospel?” There is no promise in the Law that if it is kept in obedience, that God would send His Spirit to the heart of a person to be the indwelling guest and make them obedient keepers of the Law as the temple of the Holy Spirit. The Law does not have the authority to promise the Holy Spirit. In Ezekiel we read that the promise is made, “I will put My Spirit within you,”[9] but, as the context shows, this promise refers to the future when the remnant of Israel will turn to the Lord and the promised spiritual and national blessings are given to them through grace.

The Gentile Galatians knew nothing of the Law and were not under the Law, for they were, by nature, idolaters. They received the Spirit by hearing of faith. But, before this great gift could ever be bestowed the Son of God must die on the cross and be glorified.[10] And all who receive the Lord Jesus the Anointed One by faith, also receive the great gift of grace, the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Sonship. The Galatians Gentiles received the Holy Spirit simply by believing. They were sealed by that Spirit and knew thereby that they were redeemed and the sons of God. If they possessed this seal of divine righteousness why should they add to it the works of the Law? In doing so, they would be acting very foolishly.[11] Today we might liken it to someone who changes the electricity going to their house from the power grid and replace it with batteries instead. (By the way, how will they charge their batteries?)

However, Gaebelein adds a somewhat disconcerting footnote that reads: “Strange, unscriptural doctrines concerning the Holy Spirit are taught in different sects and parties. Some teach that the Christian should earnestly seek this gift and the baptism with the Spirit. They claim that each individual must make a definite experience of receiving the baptism with the Spirit. This seeking includes, what they term, a full surrender, etc., and after enough seeking, surrender, giving up and praying, they claim to have received the power of the Holy Spirit. The argument here refutes this teaching. The Holy Spirit is given to every believer in Christ.”[12]

It seems obvious that Gaebelein was influenced by the struggle that existed among Methodists who taught that sanctification was a second work of grace. The Methodists were also first to coin the phrase baptism of the Holy Spirit as applied to a second and sanctifying grace of God.[13] The Methodists meant by their “baptism” something different from the Pentecostals, but the view that this is an experience of grace separate from and after salvation was the same. Also, that Pentecostalism had roots in the holiness movement of the late nineteenth century. The holiness movement embraced the Wesleyan doctrine of “sanctification” or the second work of grace, subsequent to conversion. Pentecostalism added a third work of grace, called the baptism of the Holy Ghost, which is accompanied by glossolalia.[14]

With all due respect to brother Gaebelein, such a view would put the Apostles, Cornelius’ household,[15] and the disciples of John the Baptizer that Paul met in the city of Ephesus[16] in a difficult position. Did the Apostles already receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit when they believed in Jesus as the Messiah as His disciples or not? If so, why did Jesus then tell them to go back to Jerusalem and wait for the Father to send the Holy Spirit? There is no record of the disciples speaking in tongues before the Day of Pentecost, only after they were all filled with the Holy Spirit in the Upper Room. And a study of Paul’s writings in Corinthians it is clear that Paul made a distinction between having the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and His accompanying gifts.[17] I’m sure that such differing interpretations will not keep either one of us out of heaven, but I believe in giving the Holy Spirit all the credit He deserves as our Comforter with His works and gifts.

Cyril W. Emmet (1874-1924) gives his explanation of what Paul means by the phrase: “by the hearing of faith.” Says Emmet, it does not imply “listening to the faith,” but “the hearing which comes from faith.[18] The Spirit came, not because they were especially obedient to the Law, but because they opened their hearts to a new influence.[19] Kenneth Wuest (1893-1963) adds his interpretation by saying that The Greek noun akoes translated “hearing” refers either to the act of hearing a message or to the message that is heard. The second meaning agrees more with the context since Paul is contrasting his message of grace with the teachings of the Judaizers. The phrase “of faith” defines or describes the message. It is a message that announces faith as the means whereby one receives salvation. The only answer the Galatians could give to this question was that they received the Spirit, not by obedience to the law, but through their faith in Paul’s message of grace.[20]

Another Jewish writer, Ariel HaNaviy, feels that no other chapter of the Bible caused more theological misunderstandings between Jewish and Christian believers than Chapter Three of Galatians! We would do well to tread cautiously when seeking to unlock its meanings, he says. As he sees it, Paul returns to his ironic way of speaking with a rhetorical question about the origins of the giving of the Holy Spirit among the Galatian believers. Surely Paul knows firsthand that the Spirit flows from God to an individual believer. However, in this portion of his letter, he is attempting to shock the readers back into some semblance of spiritual reality. Having begun with the truth of Yeshua’s atoning death, how could they possibly be considering going back on such a revelation? To the Apostle, such a notion was preposterous!

We must remember that among the Judaism Party of Paul’s day, the Greek word for law, nomos, could include references to the verbal teachings of the Rabbis, and more specifically to the rule that governed a Gentile’s conversion to Judaism. It appears that Paul is challenging the validity of these ethnically restricted views of the Torah still be held and observed among genuine First Covenant members to Christianity. Surely, maintaining their covenant relationship with God was not acquired by human effort, that is, works of the Law, but rather by placing one’s trust in the Ultimate Son of the Covenant, Yeshua Himself.

So, we understand why the Apostle Paul begins by demanding from these mixed-up Galatians, please explain something to me, did you receive the Spirit by simply becoming members of a new Jewish sect called “The Way,” but still under the Torah, or by believing what you heard me preach when I shared the Gospel with you? Paul did not wait for the answer, he immediately provides his answer, a resounding, “You were acting like fools, weren’t you? That’s the only way you could come to the conclusion that moral human achievements could in some way exceed the grace of God as afforded by His Only Son. What an exercise in futility!”[21] It’s obvious that it takes a Jewish believer like Paul to tell us what these Jews in Galatia were really thinking. That should help us understand the situation even better.

[1] Romans 7:15-24

[2] C. I. Scofield: The Fundamentals – A Testimony to the Truth, Vol. 3, op. cit., Ch. 7, p. 91

[3] George B. Stevens: Shorter Exposition of Galatians, op. cit.,

[4] See Acts 15:8, 12; cf. 10:44–47; 11:15–18).

[5] Acts of the Apostles 2:33; Ephesians 4:7–10

[6] Joel 2:28–32; cf. Num. 11:29

[7] Joel 2:30

[8] Benjamin W. Bacon, On Galatians, op. cit., p. 74

[9] Ezekiel 36:27

[10] John 7:39

[11] Arno Gaebelein: Annotated Bible, op. cit., p. 214

[12] Ibid. p. 215

[13] Cf. John Fletcher of Madeley, Methodism’s earliest formal theologian.

[14] The West Tennessee Historical Society Papers – Issue 56. West Tennessee Historical Society. 2002. p. 41.

[15] Acts of the Apostles 10:44-48

[16] Ibid. 19:1-7

[17] 1 Corinthian 12; note 12:7-13

[18] “Obedience of faith,” Romans 1:5; 14:26

[19] Cyril W. Emmet: On Galatians, op. cit., p. 28

[20] Kenneth Wuest: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit.

[21] Ariel HaNaviy: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p.104

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS

 CHAPTER THREE (Lesson VIII)

Revival preacher Charles Finney (1792-1875) in one of his lectures, spoke on justification by faith. In his lecture, he makes the point that when it comes to the doctrine of justification, we cannot overlook the distinction between sin and sinning. When our bodily appetites and built-in tendencies of body and mind are strongly tempted they often become an uninvited occasion of sin. So, it was with Adam. We cannot say that Adam was created with a sinful nature. But he possessed, by his natural instincts, an appetite for food and a desire for knowledge. These in themselves are not sinful, but were part of their human nature which made them suitable to live in this world as a subject of God’s moral government. But the temptation by the serpent was enough to persuade Adam and Eve to disobey and thereby sin against God. They were innocent in themselves but yielded to unlawful action, and that was their sin.

Now, while each of these sins may be forgiven when confessed and compassion from God is sought, those sinful tendencies, however,  are never washed away. They are within all of us constantly. Nevertheless, they are severely restricted by sanctification and with the help of the indwelling Spirit of God. When a sinner tries to use their sinful nature as a justification for sin, they get their natural appetites and sinful tendencies mixed up. By so doing, they, in fact, accuse God foolishly and incriminate Him for giving them a sinful nature, when in fact their nature, in all its elements, is essential to moral conduct, and God made it as well as it could be made, and perfectly adapted to the circumstances in which they lived in this world. The truth is, mankind’s nature is all right and is as well-fitted to love and obey God as it is to hate and disobey Him. So, says Finney, the day is not far away when it will be known whether your excuse is valid or not! Then you will find out when you stand face to face with your Maker, and He charges you with sin, will you be able to throw the blame back in His face.[1]

Philip Schaff (1819-1893) comments on verse two where Paul appeals to their own experience at the time of their conversion, which alone should be sufficient to convince them of the error of their present position on crediting the Law with bringing the Holy Spirit into their lives. By Paul saying, to know the truth a person must hear what God gave Him to say, and that would be the only source they needed. Was it by works of the Law that they received the Spirit, the Holy Spirit, the greatest of gifts? The Spirit is communicated to believers through the Gospel in order for them to be regenerated, sanctified, and made children of God and heirs of eternal life.

Schaff believes that during the time of the Apostles, the Spirit manifested Himself in extraordinary gifts such as speaking in tongues, prophesying, working of miracles.[2] That means that from hearing the preaching (not just listening), faith comes from preaching,[3] and preaching the Word of God. The Greek noun akoē (“hearing” KJV) is used in two ways: “active hearing” that involves intense listening that leads to the reception of the Gospel message by faith.[4] Then it can also imply “passive hearing,” that provides the faith needed for the reception of the Gospel message. Schaff says that Professor Lightfoot adopts the first, but the second is preferable on account of the usual meaning of the word in the Final Covenant because the contrast is between the two principles, “law and faith,” not between two actions, “doing and hearing.”

The emphasis must be placed on “law” and “faith,” says Schaff. In the Final Covenant, “faith” is used mostly in the subjective sense of the act and exercise of faith,[5] not in the objective sense of the doctrine or creed.[6] Faith is the organ by which we receive the Holy Spirit through the preaching of the Gospel.[7] So for the Jews, their subjective faith was that by obeying the Law they were saving themselves. while Christians put their objective faith in the Messiah to save them because neither the Law nor they can save themselves. That’s why any sinner seeking forgiveness and cleansing should be encouraged to pray and ask the Messiah to save them because He is the only Way, Truth, and Life.

W. A. O’Conor (1820-1887) points out that here in verse two Paul passes from using logical to experimental evidence, which by itself should be conclusive. Was it from Law or Faith they derived their present spiritual attainments? After all, the Jewish Law was meant to mature a principle for all mankind, but not all mankind for the principle. Once the Anointed One appeared, and divine truth was unfolded as a living, breathing document, and made transmittable by verbal exposition, the Law was no longer needed but rather became a hindrance. If the Galatians received the Spirit from hearing by faith, of course, it was evident that the works of the Law for that purpose were not required. Then O’Conor goes on to say that the works of the law are uncommunicative, unconscious, unmoral, and unauthorized results of a principle that resides in the Law rather than in the minds of those who perform them. They do not warm the heart or enlighten the understanding. All the grand moral and spiritual truths which are the subject-matter of faith, enlarge man’s soul and render it a fit receptacle for heavenly impulses and illuminations.^[8] No wonder the Judaizers were so out of touch with reality.

Edward Huxtable (1833-1893) hears a frustrated Apostle Paul telling the Galatians, in disbelief, that they so quickly became traitors to him and the Gospel he brought them. He told them, when I came to where you are as an Apostle sent by God to preach the Gospel, once you were baptized in water I laid my hands on you; and the Holy Spirit came down upon you, proving the reality of His presence, not only by signs and miracles and powers, but also by the love, joy, peace, and all the Fruit of the Spirit, which fills your hearts; instantaneously sealing the truth of his doctrine and their own individual position as recognized heirs of the kingdom of God.

Surely, says Paul, you must still remember those great times. Do you recall back then whether I spent any time speaking about the proper kosher diet of food or drink, or washing your hands and bodies as part of some purification process, or the requirement of circumcision, or being careful to obey the dictates of Ceremonial Law? Did you attend one session where I taught on all the points contained in the ordinances found in Leviticus? Were any of you even thinking about such things? The “works of the Law” were never mentioned and the merit of performing the ceremonies rites and rituals to obtain repentance did not come up. No! I preached about dying to sin, surrendering you souls to God and to the Messiah in faithful, loyal obedience, developing the characteristics of being God’s servants, and the plan and purpose of good works as a reasonable service to the One who called you, redeemed you, and chose you to be one of His own children, all of which were in compliance with moral Law. That’s why the gift of the indwelling Spirit and the gifts and endowment of power by the same Spirit became quickly evident by the wonders and miracles you were given the power to perform for God’s glory.

It is clear that Huxtable defined the indwelling of the Spirit as the source for regeneration and sanctification and Fruit of the Spirit, and the baptism of the Spirit as the source for the Gifts of the Spirit. So where in the world did the Galatians get the idea all of this was subordinate to following the Law in order to stand right before God, ready to do all the works required to maintain that status? So Huxtable was just as confused as the Apostle Paul was over such a contradictory stance on their part to the Gospel Paul preached to them upon his arrival.

Professor Thomas Croskery (1830-1886) gives a homiletical treatment of this exposition by Huxtable in which he offers five Principles to argue against the controversial teachings of the Judaizers. First: The “Principle of Experience.” They did not receive the Spirit by faith in works but by faith in Jesus the Messiah. Second: the “Principle of Grace in receiving the Spirit.” Since the Holy Spirit is not under the power of the Law it cannot be given by the Law. Grace is the only source for Pentecostal power and abundance. Third: the “Principle of Grace in the workings of the Spirit.” When the Spirit empowered them to do miracles among the people, the Spirit does not operate through the Law but through faith. Fourth: the “Principle of Grace in finishing what the Spirit started.” Since they began their believing and receiving of the Spirit by faith, it cannot now be transferred to the Law for completion.[9] And fifth: the “Principle of Grace in persevering to the end in order to be saved.” To show sincerity by enduring any suffering or attempts to shame; to establish that their obedience to the Gospel is the reason for what they suffer for the sake of Messiah; to never allow yourself to be persuaded that all you’ve gone through for the Messiah was a useless effort.[10]

For Joseph Beet (1840-1924), any suggestion that Christ died in vain, as would be the case if the teaching of the Judaizers were correct, reveals to Paul the spiritual blindness of the Galatian Christians as he turns to discuss the teaching these false apostles contradict. A single argument seems to him sufficient to settle the matter at hand. His Galatian readers’ journey by faith began with the reception of the Holy Spirit indwelling them as the stirring principle of a new life in union with the Anointed One. Paul asks whether they obtained the Spirit by means of obedience to legal prescriptions or by hearing with faith the preached Word of God. In thinking back, the only possibility open is that obedience to the Law may have led them to a richer and higher Christian life. But the legal prescriptions of which the Judaizers prescribed reach only to the material part of human life.

For Beet, that leads to more questions. For instance, can mere bodily obedience to laws and ceremonies develop a life begun by receiving a life-giving Spirit? Of course, the thought is absurd! Again, for the teaching of Justification by Faith apart from works of the Law, the Galatian Christians have already suffered persecution. Are they now prepared to admit that these sufferings were needless and profitless? These questions enabled Paul to ask again in stronger form his first question. Can the Spirit whom day by day dwells in the Galatian believers, and who reveals His presence by working miracles among them, be received by works of Law or by faith? Thus, not only their past but their present experience confirms the Apostle’s teaching. Grace wins! The Law loses![11]

[1] Charles Finney: Lectures to Professing Christians, Lecture 16, pp. 233-252

[2] Cf. Acts of the Apostles 8:17; 10:44-46; 19:6; 1 Corinthians 12-14

[3] 1 Thessalonians 2:13; Hebrews 4:2; and Romans 10:17

[4] Cf. (“obedience of faith);” Romans 1:5; 16:26

[5] The subjective sense means that one’s faith is in themselves rather than in the object before them.

[6] The objective sense means that one’s faith is in the object before them rather than in they themselves.

[7] Philip Schaff: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 317

[8] W. A. O’Conor: On Galatians, op. cit., p. 44

[9] Philippians 1:6

[10] The Pulpit Commentary: On Galatians, op. cit., Homiletics by Thomas Croskery, p. 148-

[11] Joseph Beet: On Galatians, op. cit., p. 77

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS

 CHAPTER THREE (Lesson VII)

3:2 So let me ask you this one question: Was it by obeying the religious rituals and regulations given by Moses that brought God’s Spirit into your life, or by hearing the Gospel preached?

Richard Weymouth in his translation has a question in verse one and then demands an answer in verse two: “You foolish Galatians! Whose sophistry has bewitched you – you to whom Jesus Christ has been vividly portrayed as on the Cross?” Answer me this one question, “Is it on the ground of your obedience to the Law that you received the Spirit, or is it because, when you heard, you believed?”[1] Paul asked a rhetorical question in verse one, but now he asks a real question. He wanted them to explain what happened and how it happened.

He then offers two reasons why they changed their perspective on salvation so quickly. One, either they were saved through the power of the Anointed One and then were persuaded to pursue religious rituals, rites, and regulations to perfect what He did in their spiritual life; or two, religious rituals, rites, and regulations saved them and then they were told to add the work of the Anointed One to their spiritual life just to make sure. So, what’s Paul’s purpose behind this inquiry? He knew that through the preaching of the Gospel they were delivered from the slavery of sin, and the bondage of those religious rituals, rites, and regulations. So, it’s important for them to confess what really brought the Spirit of freedom into their lives. Was it their continued obedience to religious rituals, rites, and regulations, or was it their faith in the cross of Jesus the Anointed One that Paul taught them?

Perhaps Paul considered comparing them to the Corinthians. He told them, you seem so gullible: you believe whatever anyone tells you even if they are preaching about another Jesus than the one, we preach, or a different spirit than the Holy Spirit you received, or shows you a different way to be saved. You swallow it all![2] Or it could be that he was prepared to repeat what he told the Ephesian believers, that when they heard the truth about the Anointed One did for them, as well as others, they put their trust in the Anointed One. Then God gave them a gift that identified them as belonging to Him. He gave His Holy Spirit to dwell in them, something He promised all believers long ago. His presence within them is God’s guarantee that He will finish the work He started in them so that they will become better and better. It was all intended to show what a wonderful, loving, caring God He is.[3] So how could they so easily throw that away for something that only promised that if you aren’t perfect, you’re going to hell?

The truth that he wanted to restate to them was what he would tell the Romans in his letter to them, that it is the Gospel that tells us if we are made right with God by faith in Him. Then, by faith, we continue to live that new life with His help.[4] Then Paul calls on the prophet Habakkuk to verify what he was saying, “The person who is right with God will live their lives by trusting in God.[5] Not only that, but the problem is that they didn’t pay attention to what Paul was telling them through the Gospel. This is something he shares with the prophet Isaiah.[6] So it seems perfectly clear that trust comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes from preaching the Gospel about the Messiah.[7]

In response to Paul’s question whether or not the Galatians received the indwelling Holy Spirit as a result of faithful law-keeping, or did it come after they put their faith in the Anointed One, early church writer Ambrosiaster (circa 335-397) sees Paul laying down a doctrine that could not be denied at that time. That is, the Holy Spirit dwells in believers. This gift was manifested by God to recall the basic elements of the faith, as it was at the beginning when it was practiced among the Apostles and the other disciples. The Holy Spirit descended on them and gave them the capacity to speak in many tongues,[8] with the gift of interpretation, so that no one dared deny the presence of the Spirit of God in them.[9]

Haimo of Auxerre (820-885 AD) gives an explanation of what he saw happening in Galatia that prompted Paul’s letter of reprimand. He questioned them by asking: Are you that foolish, after being made new in the Spirit to try now and perfect what the Spirit did, by adding your own good works? Haimo goes on to say what he really believes Paul is saying: You were converted through the power of the Holy Spirit, you began to speak through the Holy Spirit with other tongues, but you discarded all things spiritual in favor of rites, rituals, and regulations. Haimo is perplexed that they started their Christian journey by being born again, they then received the Holy Spirit, just as people did in 800-900 AD which caused them to speak in other tongues as a way of demonstrating that they possessed the Holy Spirit.[10] So he asks, did the Law do the same thing for you? Did it make you a child of God and receive the Holy Spirit that gave them the gift of speaking in tongues?[11] Sounds like Haimo was a good Pentecostal who wondered why the Galatians gave up being Pentecostal so that they might attain a higher status with God through rites, rituals, and regulations.

Thomas Aquinas adds what he finds in verse one by pointing out that by Paul’s rebuke of the Galatians he was showing the insufficiency of the Law and the influence of Faith. He is able to do that by appealing to something they experienced through the Spirit coupled to something he experienced under the Law. This then opened the door for him to magnify the fact that what they received through the Spirit was a gift, but what they expected to receive through the Law would be earned by hard work observing all the rites, rituals, and regulations of the Law.[12] Aquinas is right! You cannot earn or merit heaven.

Martin Luther adds a touch of humorous irony to Paul’s question here: It’s like Paul is saying, “Come on now, you smart Galatians, you who all of a sudden became professors, while I seem to be your pupil. I don’t think you are foolish enough to believe that you received the Holy Spirit from the Law because of your good works, or even by the preaching of the Gospel? This question gave them something to think about because their own experience contradicted such an idea.[13] After all, did not Jesus say seek and you will find?[14] And seek the kingdom of God?[15] Also, seek to enter into the narrow gate?[16] So when it comes to the Holy Spirit, all believers should seek to be filled with God’s Spirit, not just wait for it to miraculously happen without showing any desire to be filled.

John Calvin makes an observation here on Paul’s question about whether the Galatians received the infilling of the Holy Spirit by keeping the Law or from hearing about the Anointed One? Someone might object, says Calvin, that the Spirit was not, in this respect, given to all. But it was enough for Paul’s purpose, that the Galatians knew that the power of the Holy Spirit accompanied Paul’s doctrine and that believers were variously endowed with the gifts of the Spirit for general edification. Calvin goes on to say, it may likewise be objected to that since this indwelling of the Spirit could not be seen, they would not qualify without an infallible sign of adoption, and so Paul’s question does not apply to them. Calvin replies that it was enough that the Lord confirmed the doctrine of Paul by the visible gifts of His Spirit.

A still simpler view of the case, says Calvin, is that they became distinguished by the ordinary privilege of adoption before those impostors from Jerusalem brought their modifications to the Gospel. What Paul asks here complies with what he told the Ephesians, “The truth is the Good News. When you heard the truth, you put your trust in the Anointed One. Then God marked you by giving you His Holy Spirit as a promise.”[17] [18] It appears that Calvin, in his own way, understood the difference between the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The first comes at conversion and involves the gift of salvation that then blossoms into the Fruit of the Spirit. The second comes with the commission to go into all the world and preach the Gospel exercising the Gifts of the Spirit.

John Bunyan (1628-1688 AD), gives his Puritan view of what Paul says here about the indwelling of the Holy Spirit’s influence on our lives. Just like a person drinks water, if they drink good doctrine into their soul it will show great reverence for God. Therefore, the more they drink the more they will revere Him. So, if they drink a lot of good doctrines, they’ll develop even greater reverence for Him; if they just sip a little, they’ll experience little reverence for Him. And, of course, those who do not drink from the fountain of good doctrine will stimulate no respect for God. Let this be a lesson on how to discern those who revere the Lord. Those who learn and stand in awe of the Word will be those whose reverence for God will glow with its radiance in their countenance and souls.

Bunyan goes on to say that on the contrary, those with no reverence for God, that do not love good doctrine, that make no room in their hearts for the wholesome truths of the God of heaven revealed in His Covenant, to take place in their souls, are those who despise good doctrine and are only professors of its truth and not possessors of it. Earlier Bunyan pointed out that this reverence for God flows from a genuine impression so that the Word of God becomes etched in the soul. Therefore, this godly reverence flows from faith, for where the Word makes a comprehensive impression on the soul, by that impression, the fountain of faith comes alive, and from there this reverence for God flows. That’s why a proper hearing of the Word results in what the Apostle Paul asked the Galatians in this second verse: He wanted to know, did they receive the Holy Spirit by hearing what the Law said, or did they receive the Holy Spirit by listening to the Anointed One?  In fact, the writer of Hebrews tells us that a similar thing happened to Noah[19] As one Bible School teacher said, “You can’t get too much of the Word of God.”[20]

[1] Richard F. Weymouth: New Testament Translation, op. cit., loc. cit.

[2] 2 Corinthians 11:4 – Living Bible

[3] Ephesians 1:11-13

[4] Romans 1:17

[5] Habakkuk 2:4

[6] Isaiah 53:1

[7] Romans 10:16-17

[8] In a footnote there is a comment that this facility to speak in many tongues could refer to many known languages (as In Acts of the Apostles 8-10), or ecstatic utterance (as in the Corinthian controversy. cf. 1 Corinthians 12:10). If they were given the ability to speak in many languages that were understood by those listening, why would they need an interpreter? At least Ambrosiaster confirms that this was the practice among the early Apostles.

[9] Ambrosiaster: On Galatians, Edwards, M. J. (Ed.), op. cit., p. 36

[10] See Acts of the Apostles 19:1-7

[11] Haimo of Auxerre: Commentary on Galatians, Location 1292-1306, Kindle Edition

[12] Thomas Aquinas: Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit.

[13] Martin Luther: On Galatians, op. cit., pp.56-57

[14] Luke 11:5

[15] Ibid. 12:21

[16] Ibid. 13:24

[17] Ephesians 113

[18] John Calvin: The Biblical Cabinet, op. cit, pp. 61-62

[19] Hebrews 11:7

[20] John Bunyan: Vol. 4, The Fear of God, Ch. 3, p. 209

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS

 CHAPTER THREE (Lesson VI)

Philip Ryken mentioned that when people visit the Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia where he serves as senior pastor, they often wonder why there is no cross displayed in the sanctuary. In fact, Ryken feels that part of the church’s beauty is that there are no icons to distract the congregation from the worship of God. But in reality, says Ryken, every-time the Scriptures are opened and the Anointed One is preached, the message of the cross is lifted high for all to see. After all, this was John Calvin’s message to all those who desire to preach the Gospel: They must learn not only to give a sermon but carry a message that penetrates into the conscience of each listener. To do this, they must help the people to see the Anointed One crucified and that His blood still flows for the forgiveness of sin.[1] How unfortunate that in many churches there is a lighted cross behind the pulpit on the wall, but that’s the only time the people see the cross because it is seldom if ever, displayed out of the Scriptures.

A painting by the Flemish painter Jan August Hendrik Leys (1815–1869) illustrates what happens when Christians lose sight of the crucified Anointed One. The painting is called “Women Praying at a Crucifix near St. James in Antwerp.” The women themselves are portrayed with painstaking detail. Careful attention is paid to every fold in the fabric of their gowns. There is one thing missing from the painting, however, and that is the cross itself. Leys shows the women at worship, but not the Anointed One they came to adore. “So, what do we see?” asks the Dutch art critic Hans Rookmaaker (1922–1977). “People from a past period, full of faith, reverent, praying – but we do not see the object of faith, the crucified Anointed One.”[2]

I’m sure many evangelical believers would be opposed to having the crucifix on their church walls. They say that the cross is empty because the Anointed One died, was buried, and rose again. But what good does it do to preach a risen Savior if the people listening do not know under what circumstances He died? Paul told the Corinthians that he resolved to preach nothing else while he was with them except Jesus the Anointed One and Him crucified.[3]

Robert Gundry also expressed his opinion on what, “displaying the Anointed One crucified before the Galatians’ eyes” meant. The Galatians themselves did not see Jesus’ crucifixion. They didn’t take photographs in those days, and as far as we know, no artist was there to paint a picture. So, it’s not the actual crucifixion itself which they were able to witness. So, what was it?[4] It was the exhibition in words in Paul’s preaching that helped them see that crucifixion. Perhaps that’s why Paul speaks of their “hearing” of the Gospel instead of “seeing.”[5] This is another way of saying that Paul painted a word-picture of the Anointed One’s crucifixion that was so real that the Galatians were able to imagine it as being real in their minds.

Don Garlington tells us in his commentary on Galatians that Dr. Ben Witherington of England notes that in first-century Mediterranean culture a “fool” was not simply a person of moral failures but one who disrespected social boundaries, with the effect that they brought shame upon themselves (the same is true today). By way of application, writes Witherington, “The issue here in part is a violation of community boundaries, and in Paul’s view, by entering the community bounded by the Mosaic Law was to exit the community bounded by allegiance to the Anointed One. In short, Paul sees apostasy looming on the horizon and he will marshal his arsenal of arguments to prevent it.”[6] So we see that Paul did not use this term without it having its full impact on those who existed in the south Galatians culture.

In the 11th century, a Benedictine monk named Benedict of Nursia who was born around 480 AD, was immortalized with a medal showing him holding up to cross to ward off evil spirits. In fact, Pope Leo IX (1102-1045) used such a medal. Since then, when someone does not carry a Benedict Medal around their neck, they just hold up their fingers to make a cross and hold it out in front of them. You’ve no doubt seen this done in movies or on television. In a way, that’s what Paul is asking the Galatians, why didn’t you hold up the cross in front of these false teachers in order to protect yourself against their evil motives and plans to strip away your faith and make you scared that without them you would die in your sins?

Dr. David A. Brondos, professor at the Augsburg Lutheran Seminary in Mexico City finds it easy to see why Paul was such an expert on the crucifixion of the Anointed One. He states that the Jews killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets,[7] although for different reasons. It is also clear that Paul was acquainted with the narratives of Jesus’ passion because he recites the tradition about Jesus’ words and actions over the bread and cup at the Last Supper,[8] and mentions Judas Iscariot’s betrayal. Then, when writing to the Romans he quotes from Psalm 69:9 and refers to the abuse the Anointed One endured during His trial and crucifixion.[9] He also mentions Jesus’ burial and the testimonies of the many of Jesus’ first disciples concerning Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances.[10] Not only that, but Paul affirms that Jesus “gave Himself up,”[11] and was “crucified in weakness” to prove that He was aware that Jesus went to His death passively and not trying to defend Himself or flee.[12] These and other passages show beyond doubt that Paul was very acquainted with the same traditions of Jesus’ passion, death, and resurrection that we find in the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles.[13]

Duncan Heaster makes an interesting comment on what Paul was really trying to say to the Galatians about his making the Anointed One crucified very real to them, almost as though he painted a picture or carved a statue. He says: When Paul preached the Gospel to the Galatians, he was the embodiment of the crucified Anointed One. People should see in us, in our sufferings and “weakness,” something of the crucified Anointed One at the time of His death.[14] I’m not sure how the Apostle Paul would square this with what he said earlier in the letter: “I was put up on the cross to die with the Anointed One. Therefore, I no longer live. the Anointed One lives in me.”[15]

Messianic writer Thomas Lancaster doesn’t think that the sudden shift in the way the Galatians looked at their faith in light of the Law was overnight. When the Judaizer’s came in from Jerusalem, they somehow persuaded the Christians that Jews and Gentiles were all like, there was no difference between them. They all believed in God and accepted Yeshua as the Messiah. And since Yeshua said He did not come to abolish the Law but to make it complete, then it must contain some value and purpose for the Christian life. Lancaster says that this is how the Judaizers duped the gullible Galatians into adding some of the Law’s requirements to their faith. Perhaps it started with honoring the Sabbath and then abstaining from certain foods because they were not kosher. But apparently, it reached the place where many of the Gentile men were not submitting to being circumcised in order to make them true children of the covenant.[16] This is often the same way many Christians are duped into taking up certain ancient rites and rituals in order to be a really happy and secure Christian.

Jewish Christian writer David Stern does not hold back in giving his understanding of what Paul says here in verse one. He calls them “stupid Galatians!” We will find that down in verse six Paul will display his amazement at their going astray, and in 4:19-20 express his pain and confusion over what to do with them. But here he seems exasperated. He tries to arouse the Galatians’ interest in learning what they need to do right with ridicule and shame. Yet, it was all done in the context of his loving them dearly. One piece of evidence for this is that he calls them “brothers,” a favorite term of endearment among the early believers. In fact, he calls them “brothers” no less than nine times in this letter.[17]

Andrew G. Roth in his Aramaic translation points out that there is a clear wordplay between galatya, “those who live in Galatia,” and galoot, “those who are exiles, the dispersed or captives.” Roth does not translate the phrase “You foolish Exiles,” but it is very obvious that Rabbi Paul is writing to both groups. Another key point lexically is that galatya is derived from the root gelah, which means “to reveal or uncover,”[18] and this includes direct manifestations of Elohiym. It is also the root from which we get the name of the place Galilee. Finally, even though the spelling between galatya and galoot is not exactly the same in Aramaic, the wordplay exists on an audible level. Such same sounding layers of cleverness are extremely common throughout the Aramaic New Testament and are one of the strongest pieces of evidence we have for declaring its originality and primacy.[19]

[1] Ryken, Philip Graham. On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., Kindle location 1514

[2] Ibid. Kindle Location 1665

[3] 1 Corinthians 2:2

[4] Cf. 1 Corinthians 1:17-25; 2:2

[5] Robert H. Gundry: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., Kindle Location 540

[6] Don Garlington: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., 92

[7] 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15

[8] 1 Corinthians 11:23-24

[9] Romans 15:3

[10] 1 Corinthians 15:3-7

[11] Galatians 1:4

[12] 2 Corinthians 13:4

[13] David A. Brondos. Paul on the Cross: Reconstructing the Apostle’s Story of Redemption, Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 2006, (Kindle Location 1014-1022). Kindle Edition.

[14] Duncan Heaster: On Galatians, op. cit., p. 1922

[15] Galatians 2:20

[16] D. Thomas Lancaster: On Galatians, op. cit., p. 110

[17] David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary, op. cit., (Kindle Location 15474)

[18] Genesis 9:21; 35:7

[19] Andrew G. Roth: Aramaic New Testament, op. cit., loc. cit.

Did you know, if there really was no God, it would be impossible to be an atheist? So, if an atheist tells you they don’t believe there is a God, then ask them if they believe there is no God at all.  If they say “yes”, tell them it is impossible to believe in nothing, because belief requires faith, and faith is the evidence of things unseen.

Therefore, they really are saying they refuse to believe in something they cannot see.  But just because you can’t examine its elemental essence, that does not mean it doesn’t exist.  For instance, what about love, joy, peace, patience, and kindness.  So, if they ask you to prove there is a God, tell them you’ll do so as soon as they prove there is no God. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

ARE YOU READY FOR WHAT’S COMING?

In 2009, Dr. John N. Oswalt (Ph.D., Brandeis University), Visiting Distinguished Professor of Old Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky, wrote a book titled, “The Bible among the Myths: Unique Revelation or Just Ancient Literature?” published by Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan.  At the end of this thoroughly researched and enlightening work, Dr. Oswalt made 10 predictions of things to come in our society.  Now ten years later, many of them are beginning to come into being.  I find them extremely insightful, thought I’d share them with you, compliments of Dr. Oswalt.

■ First and foremost, ethics as an internal compass will disappear from among us. Ethics will certainly remain as civic requirements, and there will be various public attempts to enforce them, but in the society at large, they will be meaningless.

■ “Truth” will progressively be replaced by power, since there is no standard of reliability outside of each person’s own needs and wishes.

■ “Right” and “wrong” will become increasingly useless terms as they lose any agreed-upon basis outside of those same wants and needs. The terms will continue to be used, but only as code words for those who can shout the loudest.

■ There will be a dramatic upsurge in interest in “black magic” as a means of getting one’s way.

■ Any attempt to control absolute sexual freedom in any area and at any level will be labeled as “hate-mongering.”

■ Individuals will be increasingly devalued at the same time that “individual freedom” is more and more loudly trumpeted.

■ Altruism and other forms of self-denial for the good of others will steadily disappear.

■ Acceptance of responsibility for one’s own behavior, accompanied by appropriate changes of behavior, will be a rarity.

■ The study of history, except as an ancient antiquarian interest, will disappear.

■ The possibility of a genuine transformation of one’s character from the worse to the better will be dismissed out of hand.

If you have seen any of these trends in society in recent days and months, are you preparing yourself as a person would do if a Hurricane, or Tsunami, or Volcanic eruption had been announced? What set of survival rules would you follow? Jesus foretold such events as coming in the last days (Mt. 24:1-51). The Scriptures make it very clear: don’t give up hope; keep your faith strong; let God’s Word be a lamp for your feet (2 Tim. 3:-17), for those who endure until the end will be saved (Mt. 24:13). – Dr. Robert R Seyda

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS

 CHAPTER THREE (Lesson V)

Sir Robert Anderson (1841-1918), evinces a skilled writer’s way of expressing what Paul’s word-picture of the Anointed One on the cross really meant to the Galatians. Through Paul’s efforts, faith that was unseen became real; and to those who believe in the cross, they saw His marred and agonized face. They were witnesses to the reproach that broke His heart, the scorn, the derision, and the hate, of the screaming mob. They heard Emmanuel’s orphan cry asking, “My God, My God why have You forsaken Me!”[1] And by gazing on that painful scene, their inmost being underwent a transformation. Only yesterday worldly pleasure and selfishness held their hearts hostage and filled the whole horizon of their lives.

But now, says Anderson, the cross gave them the power to rid themselves of selfishness and to separate themselves from the world which crucified their Lord. O, says Anderson, for power to preach the cross of the Anointed One so that it will become a reality to all, whether they accept it or despise it. And those who despise the cross see what priests and soldiers saw, and the rabble crowd that mocked His agonies exclaiming, “It is impossible that this can be the Son of God!” But for those who cherish the old rugged cross, they will see what the Apostle John and Jesus’ mother Mary witnessed, and will cry out, with broken hearts mingled with love and grief, “My God, My God, why did You do this for me?” and turn to live devoted lives for Him who died in their place and rose again for their glory.”[2]

And in another of his writings Anderson sees an additional aspect in the passion of the Anointed One and how it impacted God’s people. He notes that within the era of sacred Hebrew history the periods of deepest gloom were enlightened by prophetic testimony, for the prophets were accredited ambassadors of heaven. And yet there were intervals during which there was “no open vision” – times when the twilight of that age was darkened by clouds due to idolatry and exile that covered all the sky. And throughout the centuries between the last of the Hebrew prophets and the preaching of John the Baptizer, the silence of heaven remained unbroken. And in those times of deepest gloom, it was that faith achieved some of its noblest victories. For the faith that suffers is greater than the faith that can boast of open triumph and has this no voice for us today?

Anderson goes on to question, is it not appalling that in the full light of the Christian revelation, we “before whose eyes Jesus the Anointed One was openly hanged and crucified,” as Paul says here in verse one, should still require spirit manifestations, or even individual experiences, to confirm the truth of the promises of God? And yet tidings reach us from all lands that earnest and spiritual Christians are somehow being deluded, and thrown into a frenzy of exultation, by meaningless mutterings of what is called the “gift of tongues,” or by other proofs of a spiritual presence from the unseen world. During the last century, there were many religious movements of this character, and there was not one of them that did not end in disaster.

Anderson continues. If real spiritual power, bringing ecstatic joy and peace to its adherents, could accredit a religious movement as divine, the Irvingite apostasy[3] had credentials incomparably superior to any that can be appealed to by similar revivals today.[4] History suggests that Sir Robert received these reports from persons who were obviously against the renewal of Pentecost. Today there are approximately 280 million Pentecostals around the world, and it is the fastest-growing segment of Christianity.

Bible teacher Walter Adeney (1849-1920), makes a good point on Paul’s word-picture to the Galatians of a Savior dying for their salvation. Paul does not try to hide the awfulness of the cross and the bloody crucifixion of the Son of God. This suggests a vivid, pictorial style of language joined to an energetic, almost dramatic, force of expression. The whole effort of the Apostle was to make his hearers not only see the Anointed One but feel His pain. No doubt Paul’s method was in some respects especially adapted to the Celtic responsiveness to their semi-barbarous past.

It certainly and was in a form very different from the Apostle’s manner of speaking to the cultured Athenians on the Areopagus. Yet to the Greeks at Corinth he says he determined to know nothing among them “save Jesus the Anointed One, and Him crucified.” Then laments Adeney, he is afraid that lately, the pulpit lost its influence by abandoning the argumentative type of preaching with respect to the supposed higher intelligence of the current age (early 1900s), using as a defense that the average believer doesn’t like confrontational preaching. Therefore, it must be curtailed because they are so susceptible to visual images. Whatever they may say as to the best method of presenting the Gospel, it is plain that what is most needed for the well-informed person, as well as, the least informed individual is that in order to understand Christian theology, they must see the Anointed One through the preaching of the Word.[5]

Cyril W. Emmet (1875-1924), English clergyman and Scholar of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, offers an interesting insight into the discussion of the “evil eye.” We learn that since ancient times it was supposed to have a disastrous magical effect. But as used here by Paul it probably was only said as a metaphor. So Emmet goes on to say that if the Galatians had kept their eyes fixed on the painting in Paul’s preaching of Jesus being crucified in their place, they would have been immune to any influence of the “evil eye” which could only take effect if the victim met the gaze of the sorcerer.[6] No wonder the writer of Hebrews gave them explicit instructions to keep their eyes fixed on the Lord.[7]

Kenneth S. Wuest (1893-1961), Evangelical Biblical Greek scholar, looks at Paul’s words here in verse one from a grammarian’s point of view. He tells us that the people of the province of Galatia were those who were able to overcome the degrading influence of their native magic and superstition. They were able to judge for themselves as to the real values in life and lay claim to insight and wisdom. However, Paul accuses them with failing to use that insight and wisdom, that appreciation of the better things, when he uses the Greek adjective anoētos translated as “foolish” (KJV).

The word anoētos, says Wuest, denotes the stupidity that arises when one’s intellect becomes unresponsive to stimuli and no longer functions as it should. It means “lacking in the power of perception.” It refers to one who does not reflect. The word speaks of failure to use one’s powers of conceptualization. The Galatians, Paul says, were certainly not using their heads. This word is used with an ethical reference as the faculty of moral judgment. Thus, the word indicates a failure to use one’s powers of perception to detect right from wrong, the good from the bad. In this case, such a failure revealed a serious moral defect. It is always true, as it was with the Galatians, that the act of a Christian who embraces false doctrine, is often due in an attempt to excuse sin in their life. The Galatian defection was not due to any fickleness of their French ancestors. Don’t blame it on them. Paul sends this stinging rebuke: O Galatians, you failed in living up to one of the first characteristics of the Galatian people, namely, the ability to use their heads and to appreciate the finer values of life.[8]

Grant Osborne, an American theologian, and professor at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School says that the reason the Galatians’ actions were so foolish was that Paul’s teaching of the Gospel was so unmistakably evident. That’s why Paul told them that before their very eyes Jesus the Anointed One was clearly portrayed as crucified. The truth was openly proclaimed and publicly understood. Osborne asks us to note the play on words: The Galatians’ opponents used an “evil eye” to bewitch them, but they earlier saw the truth with their “own eyes” and not be taken in by such legalistic logic as what the Judaizers were teaching. There is no way for them to miss the truth, and yet these heretics managed to pull the wool over their eyes, so to speak. Paul is in effect asking “How could you be so gullible?” Jesus the Anointed One crucified is the heart and soul of the Gospel, and to replace the cross with the works of the law is unimaginable.[9] In other words, until you see the Anointed One, you cannot see the Truth, the Way, and the Life as revealed by the Gospel.

Mark D. Nanos, who contributed much time to investigating the implications for Jewish – Christian relations of his reading of Paul as a Torah-observant Messianic Jew, talks about what we understand from verse one as Paul’s surprise or astonishment over the Galatians failing to live up to the standards of faith in the Anointed One he gave them from the Gospel, and be deceived into following someone else’s ideas of living by works instead of faith. He said it reminded of a parent scolding their wayward child who ended up with the wrong crowd and started doing things they were told they shouldn’t do. He senses the embarrassment that a parent often feels because their child’s behavior makes them look bad and suggests that didn’t do a very good job raising them.[10] If Paul felt that way about the Galatians, no doubt he was only expressing his Father in heaven’s disappointment as well.

Another Christian Jewish writer, Avi ben Mordechai, focuses on the faith in the Anointed One that the Gentiles strayed from. In the First Covenant, “faith” always meant trust in YaHWeH,[11] and “faithfulness” in having and doing what YaHWeH told them to do.[12] This is what demonstrated Abraham’s faith and faithfulness.[13] However, by the time Yeshua came, Abraham’s descendants ceased following his example. When it came to religious life and practice, the teachings of the Pharisees and scribes replaced the Torah teachings that Yeshua was reminding them of. They caused the Galatians’ minds to experience shipwreck because living by Pharisaic law requires faith in the rabbis, not in YaHWeH. This is the sourdough that Jesus warned about[14].[15] Unfortunately, in many churches, the same thing has happened. The philosophy of “positive thinking” and “super-abounding grace” replaced the words of Yeshua so that faith is now in the minister and not the Messiah.

[1] Matthew 27:46; cf. Psalm 22:1

[2] Sir Robert Anderson: The Gospel and It’s Ministry, op. cit., Ch. 3, p. 26

[3] Founded by Edward Irving and others in the early 1830’s England. The Irvingate movement was originally involved with the great advent awakening. Edward believed his preaching of the coming of JESUS became more effective by calling on the Spirit and gift of tongues and interpretation. He died before he could be tried by a London court for heresy. In 1863 the Germans split from the U.K. parent church and did very well in growth. The origin of the secret rapture theory can be traced back to a vision by Miss Margaret McDonald of the same movement. Both Edward Irving and Miss McDonald were Scottish.

[4] Sir Robert Anderson: Types in Hebrews, Ch. 11, p. 57

[5] Walter Adeney: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit.,

[6] Cyril W. Emmet: On Galatians, op. cit., pp. 27-28

[7] Hebrews 12:2

[8] Kenneth Wuest: Word Studies, op. cit., loc. cit.

[9] Osborne, G. R: On Galatians, op. cit., loc., cit., p. 83

[10] Mark D. Nanos: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 48-49

[11] 2 Chronicles 20:20

[12] Exodus 24:1-7; Nehemiah 9:13; Psalms 119:42

[13] Genesis 26:5

[14] Matthew 16:11-12

[15] Avi ben Mordechai, On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 27

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS

 CHAPTER THREE (Lesson IV)

English evangelical preacher Charles Simeon (1759-1836) does not hold back when he says that the method of a sinner’s justification is plainly revealed in the Gospel. Also, there is no other doctrine more worthy of attention. There are numerous disagreements among scholars on plenty of other points concerning our salvation. But to be mistaken on this point that Paul makes here in verse one is to destroy all hope of acceptance by God as being right with Him. That’s why Paul is ready to place a curse on even an angel from heaven who comes with another Gospel if it could even be imagined that anyone could be found who would introduce a Gospel different from that which Paul himself preached. Unhappily, however, the Galatians were misled. The Apostle writes this epistle in order to reclaim them: he tells them that he even criticized Peter himself, and that, too, before the whole Church at Antioch, for dissembling the truth. He then goes on to also accuse their attempts at worsening the situation between Jews and Gentiles.[1] I’m afraid that pastor Simeon would not be welcomed at an ecumenical ministers’ conference today.

John Brown (1784-1858) understands that when Paul speaks of the “truth” here in verse one, he means the truth as it is found in the Gospel of Jesus Messiah – that is, the true way to salvation through Jesus the Son of God. Some, says Brown, equate obeying the truth of what the Scriptures say of faith, much the same as obeying the Law should be equated with faith. But it is just the other way around. One obeys the truth of the Scripture because they have faith in the One who promises salvation, not the scriptures themselves. As Brown sees it, this refers to the complete transformation of character which results from accepting the truth and yielding to its power by letting it take full control over the mind. Apparently, as Paul saw it, the Galatians were not doing this. If they were truly walking by faith then their eyes would be fastened upon Jesus as the only One with the power and authority to save them.[2] That’s why they received the Holy Spirit as believers, not as workers trying to fulfill the Law, the same way that Abraham was given a right standing before God as a believer, not a worker.

German Protestant theologian Heinrich A. W. Meyer (1800-1873), notes that Paul begins to unfold to his readers that righteousness does not come from the Law, but from faith. But Paul wasn’t finished, after he censured the Galatians because of their surprising turnabout, he then asks them to look at their own experience, namely, to their reception of the Holy Spirit. You may be able to change a person’s mind about something, but they know what they personally experienced. In addressing his readers who allowed themselves to be carried away to that same strange intermingling of Law and Grace, Paul could not have built on any grounds more suitable or more natural. But Meyer finds the idea of Catholic scholar Jerome, who felt he discovered in this an expression tied to the natural weakness of understanding peculiar to the Galatians. However, the testimony offered on the other hand by Johann Jakob Wetstein (1693-1754) regarding the Galatian’s readiness to learn, and acuteness of understanding – the consciousness of which would make the reproach all the more keenly felt – is also to be set aside as irrelevant. By asking “Who has bewitched you,” Paul conveys his astonishment at how quickly this perversion succeeded in attaining such success.[3]

John Edmunds (1800-1874) wants to know what was it about these Judaizers and their message that fascinated the Galatians so much they became spellbound by them?  Couldn’t they see that they were allowing themselves to be victims of designing heretics who were passing off justification by way of a system of legal works which was entirely at odds with the Gospel Paul preached to them? Could it be that these false apostles knew how to casts spells? Were they witches in disguise? This doesn’t mean that the Apostle Paul believed in such things, but it was something most people of that age took for granted as being real.[4] While in our day such things still exist on the fringes of society, the biggest danger for Christians is to become fascinated by the world and their way of living. They seem to get by when committing even the most immoral conduct without penalty. Don’t let it fool you, they are the fools who live as if there is no God, no hell, and no eternal punishment. What a wake-up they will receive on God’s Judgment Day!

W. A. O’Conor (1820-1887), makes an interesting point here when he says that the works of the law are unarticulated, unconscious, amoral, and unauthorized results of a principle that resides in the law rather than in the minds of those who perform them. In other words, if the Law did not demand it those things would never be done. They do not warm the heart or enlighten the understanding. All the grand moral and spiritual truths which are the subject-matter of faith, enlarge man’s soul and render it a fit receptacle for heavenly impulses and illuminations. Since spoken language is on a higher level than sign language, so communication made by language must excel in dignity those made by signs. Sign language does not convey the tone or intensity of words. The whole rationale-thinking process, the mental activities, the wide illustrative knowledge, which faith employs and stimulates, are more conducive to the growth and inspiration of man’s mind than any system of law possibly can be. It might help us to fully understand Paul’s meaning by accepting Galatian’s and Roman’s experience as an element in Christian education. So, it is by hearing or reading those truths which faith receives are conveyed from mind to mind, heart to heart.[5] Now we see why in Paul’s mind, hearing the Gospel was so important.

Alvah Hovey (1820-1903) states that after having vindicated his claim to be an Apostle called by God and instructed by the Anointed One Himself through revelation, and recognized as a fellow Apostle by the elder Apostles, he is brought, by his protest and argument against Peter’s course in Antioch, to the deepest ground of his opposition to the Judaistic error, which is, that they are nullifying the grace of God by virtually pronouncing the Anointed One’s death as unnecessary. This appears so irrational to the deeply moved Apostle, that he cannot refrain from speaking frankly in addressing the Galatians. Their course suggests the influence of such fascination as is popularly attributed to “the evil eye.” It is a surprising, unaccountable course, especially when the Apostle recalls the clearness with which he portrayed to them the atoning death of the Anointed One.[6]

Alexander MacLaren (1826-1910), Scottish Baptist preacher wrote that he was struck by the metaphor of an evil eye that runs through the whole question of what caused the Galatians to so suddenly turn away from the truth to falsehood about justification and salvation, and the word-picture of Jesus crucified on the cross for our redemption. He concludes that what Paul was trying to do was get their eyes off the Judaizers and put them on Jesus. This was the only way to break the spell and loose them from the spell they were under. The power of the Anointed One on the cross is much greater than the eye of any magic hypnotist.

I like the way Maclaren ends one of his sermons on this text in verses 1-3. He exhorted all those who were listening; he encouraged them to get their eyes on Jesus; this is the secret of triumph over the fascinations of the world. And, the longer we look, then the sweetness we experience will destroy all the seducing power of lesser and earthy sweetness, and the blessed light of the sun will all but extinguish the deceitful gleams that tempt us into the swamps where we could be drowned. Turn away,  says MacLaren, from these things; grasp hold of Jesus the Anointed One; and although we may be as weak as a hummingbird before a cobra, or a rabbit before a tiger, He will give us strength, and the light of His face shining down on us will fix our eyes and make us insensible to the fascinations of the occultist. So, we will not need to dread the question, “Who bewitched you?” That’s because we are strengthened by the power of our answer: no one and nothing will separate us from the love of God through the Anointed One?[7] O Lord, prays MacLaren, we always want to be near You. So, turn away our eyes from being tempted by vanity, and enable us to keep You always before our eyes so that we be not moved.[8]

Marvin Vincent (1834-1922) Greek word study scholar, points out an interesting insight into what Paul says here in verse one about the “evil eye.” He notes that in the writings of Sirach “Ecclesiastucus”,[9] this same word is used to define being “envious.” And in certain Greek writings it is used as “slanderous.”[10] So we see that the two ideas of “envy” and “malice” and the “evil eye” are combined. We see this in what Jesus said in Mark 7:22. As a result, Paul’s metaphor here is “Who has cast an evil spell on you?” It follows that Chrysostom, followed by Lightfoot, think that the passage indicates, not only the baleful influence on the Galatians but also the envious spirit of the false teachers who envy them and their liberty in the Anointed One. Vincent is not so sure this can be proven in the text.[11]

Bible scholar Joseph Beet (1840-1924), feels that it is only right to assume that the explanation of this Epistle is that in Galatia there were men who bitterly opposed Paul’s teaching that the good things of the Final Covenant are received by faith and in proportion to our faith, apart from obedience to the Mosaic Law or to any law; and that these teachers insinuated that Paul’s authority was inferior to that of the earlier Apostles because it did not come from them, and implied that he proved unfaithful to the teaching they committed to him. That his authority as a teacher, and his teaching, were not derived from them from any accredited source. So, they were making a personal attack on Paul, not just on the Gospel that he preached. No doubt, this would make the Galatians less sure that what he told them was the truth.[12]

[1] Charles Simeon: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit.

[2] John Brown: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., pp. 106-119

[3] Heinrich A. W. Meyer: On Galatians, op. cit., p. 100

[4] John Edmunds: On Galatians, op. cit., p. 42

[5] O’Conor, W. A: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., pp. 44–45

[6] Alvah Hovey: On Galatians, op. cit., pp. 36–37

[7] Romans 8:38-39

[8] Alexander MacLaren: Exposition on Scripture, On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 108

[9] Sirach 14:8

[10] Aristophanes: The Knights [40]; Plutarch: Moralia, 6:1, p. 24

[11] Marvin Vincent. Word Studies in Galatians, op. cit., (Kindle Location 550)

[12] Joseph A. Beet: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 72

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS

 CHAPTER THREE (Lesson III)

Jerome makes it sound like Paul thought witchcraft was being used to pull the Galatians away from the Gospel. But the Greek verb baskainō must not be misinterpreted in such a way as to make Paul sound like he was legitimizing witchcraft as having such power. Rather, he used a colloquial expression that was adopted as a part of everyday speech. In other words, Paul was using “bewitched” as a metaphor, not in the literal sense. Instead, Paul no doubt meant that just as a small child may be dazzled by even the simplest magic trick, so too the Galatians, recently born in the faith of the Anointed One and nourished with milk, not solid food, had been fooled by some false teachers whose knowledge of the Anointed One did not exceed what they learned from Paul.

And since Paul, says Jerome, was using Holy Scripture to portray the Anointed One before their eyes, was using a whole chorus of First Covenant prophets who spoke of His suffering and passion, His blows and whippings, and the graphic picture of torture painted by the prophet Isaiah.[1] And Jerome doesn’t think it was the majority of Galatian believers who were led astray. Paul may have intended this letter as a reprimand for one particular church, along with instructions for them to pass the letter around to others as a warning. No doubt the reading of the prophets continually and recalling all the teachings of Paul that they were able to hold their ground against being deceived.[2]

Medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274 AD) feels that Paul scolded the Galatians for being so foolish in leaving their faith-based right standing with God, but at the same time, he rebukes them for doing so with a mental word picture he painted for them of the Anointed One dying on the cross for their salvation. Aquinas uses the Latin Version of the Bible which calls the Galatians as “senseless.” But it isn’t common sense they are lacking, but a spiritual sense.[3] Aquinas then points to Paul’s accusation that they were bewitched. For him, not only did the Galatians lack spiritual sense but what spiritual sense they did possess became delusional. They thought that everyone would see them as Courageous Lions of the Truth, but instead, Paul saw them as Cowardly Liars of the Truth.

When Martin Luther read the opening verse here in Galatians, he remarked that Paul criticizes the Galatians rather sharply when he calls them “fools, bewitched, and disobedient.” Whether he is indignant or sorry, says Luther, he may be both. As far as Luther is concerned, it is the duty of any Christian pastor to scold the people committed to their charge. Of course, the pastor’s anger must not flow from meanness, but from affection and a real zeal for the Anointed One. And when dealing with believers who don’t seem to know how or don’t care to follow instructions, each pastor must remember that grace does not suddenly transform a Christian into a new and perfect saint. There are some small and some large deposits of the old and sinful nature that remain stuck to them.

The Spirit of God chooses not to overcome all human deficiencies at once. Sanctification takes time. Not because the Spirit is slow, but because believers are slow in giving up their old habits. Although the Galatians were enlightened by the Holy Spirit through the preaching of faith, something of their national trait of foolishness plus their original depravity clung to them. Let no person think that once they receive faith, they can presently be converted into a faultless being. The grime of old vices will stick to them, be they ever so good a Christian.[4] In another writing, Luther had this interesting thought about the subject here in Chapter three: The law, with its righteousness, is like a cloud without rain, which promises rain but gives none; even so does the law promise salvation, but never gives it, for the Law was not assigned for that purpose, says Paul.[5]

John Calvin makes a pointed jab at some critics here with regard to Paul saying that he pictured the Anointed One crucified right before the Galatian’s eyes. Calvin confessed that the way things were in his day there plenty of theologians who cannot bear it went books contain such images as the one Paul painted. So, he asks, how did they become so stupid? Was it the fact that they were cheated out of the only doctrine which was proper to instruct them? The simple reason why those in charge of churches gave up their office of teaching the Gospel and taught idols was that they themselves were dumb. Of what use, then, were the hanging in churches of so many crosses of wood and stone, silver and gold, if this doctrine was faithfully and honestly being preached, showing that the Anointed One died that He might bear our curse upon the cross, that He might wash away our sins by the sacrifice of His body, wash them in His blood, and, in short, reconcile us to God the Father? From this one doctrine, the people would learn more than from a thousand crosses of wood and stone. As for crosses of gold and silver, it may be true that the covetous give their eyes and minds to them more eagerly than to any heavenly instructor.[6]

William Perkins (1558-1602) notes that there were many even in his day that could be labeled as “enemies of the cross.” However, when such a weighty and special part of the Christian religion is very much neglected, Perkin’s cries out: O man or woman, high or low, young or old, if you have been wanting to know the Way, begin though it may cause you embarrassment to learn, learning truly to know the Anointed One. That you may begin to behold Him often, not still on the wooden crucifix after the Roman Catholic manner, but in the preaching of the Word, and in the Ordinances, in which you will see Him crucified before your eyes, as Paul says here in verse one. Desire not only here upon earth to behold Him with the physical eye, but look upon Him with the eye of true and lively faith, applying Him and His merits to yourself as your own, and that with a broken and bruised heart, as the poor Israelites stung with fiery serpents even to death, looked up to the brazen serpent in the wilderness of Sinai. Again, you must look upon Him first of all as through a spiritual crystal, in which you will see God’s glory greater in your redemption, than in your original creation.[7]

Catholic scholar and priest Cornelius à Lápide (1567-1637 AD), in his commentary on Galatians, gives us an interesting picture of Galatia in his day. When Paul called them “foolish,” they gave him plenty of reasons to do so. Cornelius points to what some of the historians say about them. For instance, a philosopher from Crete named Epimenides (flourished in the 6th century BC), accused all Cretans of being liars; charges the Arabs with insincerity; the Dalmatians (Serbia today) with ferocity. All the poets condemn the cowardice of the Phrygians (Turks). Cicero asserts that the Greeks are frivolous by nature and empty by education. He agrees with Jerome who said each province forms its own characteristics.

In the same way, says Lápide, the Apostle Paul charges the Galatians with the defects inherent in their ethnicity in describing them as somber, stubborn, and slow to wisdom. Hilary of Poitiers (310-367 AD), calls the Gauls obstinate; and again, he insists that the stupidity of the Galatians can be traced to their inclination to believe to all sorts of foolish heresies. Lápide then tells how he once visited Ancyra (Ankara today), the largest metropolis of Galatia, will agree that they were torn with schisms. They can’t get along with each other, let alone foreigners. This is what Paul was dealing with, and to know this should help us understand why he was so frustrated with the sudden turn back to doing things the old way.

But Lapide is also drawn to how this verse is interpreted by early church scholars. For instance, Jerome interprets the Latin verb præscriptus (Greek, prographō – “set forth” KJV; “portrayed” NIV) to mean that the death of Christ was, predicted by the prophets and in the sacraments of the Old Law. But Lapide says there is a third and better meaning. The Anointed One was put in writing, or by a picture, before their very eyes, crucified. The Galatians were not spectators of the actual Crucifixion, but by preaching and faith the Anointed One was represented to them as crucified. The sense, then, is: Though crucified at Jerusalem in fact, yet the Anointed One was presented as though He was crucified for them to see. O Galatians, by my preaching and your eyes of faith, says Paul, you saw Christ hanging on the Cross more clearly than did the Jews who stood at its foot. Who, then, has cast a spell upon those eyes which have so clearly seen Christ crucified?[8]

William Burkitt (1654-1703) seems filled with emotion as he describes what Paul remembers how it was when he taught the Galatians the story of Jesus. For him, the senseless and atrocious aggravation caused by this cowardly act of the Galatians occurred after Jesus the Messiah was evidently portrayed by Paul in order for them to visualize the scene as though they were standing there on Calvary to see the horror of His brutal suffering and agonizing death. Yes, the Messiah who bought their freedom from the bondage of the ceremonial law with great purpose and design for their liberty in grace. Paul made it so real that they could see the Messiah being crucified as they stood and watched.

Then Burkitt turns to the Judaizing professors, heretics, and false teachers and labels them with the infamous brand of being spiritual sorcerers, and calling their doctrines spiritual witchcraft: O foolish Galatians, who has made such fools out of you? As sorcerers, deluding the senses, made people believe that what they see can disappear by the sleight of hand in the same way an illusionist makes an object appear and disappear into thin air. Heretics are no better. They manipulate human reasoning so as to take what is half-truth and make them believe it is the whole truth. Sorcerers are able to do things beyond their own ability and skill by the help of Satan, and heretical spirits are often, with Satan’s cooperation, make their doctrines based on imagination so attractive that it draws multitudes of followers. O foolish Galatians, who has so successfully dazzled and deluded you with such success?[9]

I like the way Matthew Henry (1662-1714) puts it in what we often call, “plain English.” In other words, short, precise, and to the point. He sees the Apostle Paul here in verse one dealing with those who, after embracing the Messiah by faith, they still continued to seek justification through works of the Law, depending on their own obedience to the Law’s moral precepts as their right standing before God. But finding it inefficient, added sacrifices and the rite of purifications to make up for the difference. At first. Paul sharply admonishes them, and then endeavors, by telling them the truth, to go back to trusting in the Messiah alone for their justification. This, says Henry, is the right way to do it. Once we admonish someone about any fault or an error is to show them why it is a fault or error.[10]

[1] Isaiah 53

[2] Jerome: On Galatians, op. cit., Edwards, M. J. (Ed.), pp. 35–363:27.

[3] See Matthew 15:16

[4] Martin Luther: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 55

[5] Martin Luther: Table Talk, Of the Law and the Gospel, p. 281

[6] Calvin, John: Institutes of the Christian Religion, op. cit., Of the Knowledge of God the Creator, the Argument, Bk. 1, Ch. 11, p. 125

[7] William Perkins. Knowing Christ Crucified, op. cit., p. 633

[8] Cornelius à Lápide: Ibid, p. 261

[9] William Burkitt: On Galatians: op. cit., p. 313

[10] Matthew Henry: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

By Dr. Robert R Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS

 CHAPTER THREE (Lesson II)

As Paul himself stated on occasions of being familiar with the classical writings of the Greek philosophers. Whether or not he took the time to read the Dialogues of Plato we don’t know, but living in a society influenced by these works, it’s possible to assume he was aware of their message. In Plato’s “Euthyphro,” there is a dialogue between Euthyphro and Socrates in which they are discussing the good old days when people were honored for their righteous living and were thereby loved and favored by the gods. Socrates reminds Euthyphro: Remember when we talked about how people who are holy or dedicated are the ones loved by the gods, or did they forget? Oh no, replied Euthyphro, I still remember. And do you agree, Socrates continues, that the gods’ love and hold dear that which is holy? That’s true, said Euthyphro. Even to the Greeks, people who dedicated themselves to that which was holy were seen as desired role models and inspired great admiration.

Paul struggled with the fact that the Galatians forgot so quickly the very thing that made them new creatures in the Anointed One; it was not their piety or efforts that filled their hearts with joy but their love and faith in the Anointed One. Given the same phenomenon in today’s churches, when comparing them to congregations as far back as 100 years ago, what do we see that’s been lost over time?  Certainly we don’t recommend going back to wearing the same clothes, singing the same songs, following the same formats for worship services, enforcing the same strict codes of outward holiness to please church authorities instead of God, or holding the same biases and expressing the same animosity toward other denominations; but what about the fire, the revivals, the mighty move of the Holy Spirit turning villages, towns and even cities upside-down? Where did that go?

Was it the same thing that made Paul’s heartache? Is it the same that makes those who remember the church they belong to and the church they heard about from their parents, are teary-eyed with sorrow as they sit through church services today? If anything, it may be that the saints of days gone by were seen as totally, entirely, completely, and wholeheartedly sold out to God. The Father, Son, Holy Spirit, and the Word of God was the number one priority in their lives. Everything else took second place. Each time they attended church it was with the expectation that something miraculous was going to happen. They were laughed at and ridiculed as Holy Rollers but held their heads high. Not out of pride, but with courage and virtue; to honor God who reigned supreme in their hearts and minds, regardless of the consequences.

Paul delivered a similar message to the wavering Corinthians when he wrote: I preach that the Anointed One died on a cross to save people from their sins. These words are hard for the Jews to listen to. The Greek people think it is foolish. But the Anointed One is the power and wisdom of God to those who are chosen to be saved from the punishment of sin for both Jews and Greeks.[1] When Paul arrived in the province of Galatia, he aimed for the same goal as the one he aimed at when he went to the area of Corinth.[2]

Apparently, Paul also shared with the Galatians a very graphic illustration of how the Anointed One died on the cross for their sins.  It almost makes you wonder if Paul was in the crowd to watch Jesus die in order to make the crucifixion so detailed. Not only was Jesus the Anointed One the center of Paul’s revelation on the road to Damascus, but the Anointed One and the cross became the main theme of all Paul’s sermons. Since Paul never minced words, it appears he spoke of the Anointed One’s suffering and death with His beatings, hanging, bleeding, crying out, and dying on a cross made of splinter filled logs, which left little to the imagination.

One of the earliest Church writers, Tertullian (155-240 AD), thought it was incredible to think that the Apostles were either ignorant of the whole scope of the message which they were to declare or failed to make known to all men the entire rule of faith, as the heretics were claiming. They base their criticism on Paul’s rebuke of the Galatians.[3] They also offer what Paul told the Corinthians because of their constant quarreling.[4] So it may not be what the Apostles were preaching but that the churches, through their own fault misinterpreted what the Apostles were telling them. When these heretics raise their objection to the churches being rebuked, let them not forget that because of these rebukes the churches were also corrected. After all, it was over those same churches that Paul said he kept thanking God, through Jesus the Anointed One, for all of them because the whole world knew of their faith in the Anointed One.[5]

You would think that after this impassioned plea to the Galatians that they not turn away from their faith in the Gospel and also not turn toward each other in contention and debate that it would have quieted down. But we read in a letter by Basil, Bishop of Caesarea (329-380 AD), to Petrus II, the Bishop of Alexandria (c. 340-381 AD), that even up until his day there was friction and strife among the Churches in Galatia by outsiders. He wrote that the Arians[6] to the detriment of the Church has nevertheless been endurable to me, because of their being the work of open foes and enemies of the word of truth. It is when these men do something unusual that I am astonished, not when they attempt something great and daring against true religion. But I am grieved and troubled at what is being done by men who feel and think like me.

So, I was not agitated, says Basil, at the recent disorderly proceedings because I preferred to wait for somebody else to give you such disagreeable news. Also, I did not think it reasonable that I should show indignation at such proceedings, as though I were annoyed at being ignored. To the actual agents in the matter, I have written in encouraging terms, exhorting them, because of the dissension arising among some of the brethren there, not to fall away from being kind, but to wait for the matter to be set right by those who have authority to remedy disorders due to ecclesiastical problems. I am grateful to the Lord that you are a staunch supporter of ancient discipline, and that the Church has not lost her own might in my persecution.

Though aggravated again by the Galatians, I was never able to give them an answer, because I waited for your decision. Now, if the Lord so will and they will consent to listen to me, I hope that I shall be able to bring the people back to Church. It cannot then be thrown back in my face that I have sided with Bishop Marcellus of Ancyra (c. 300-374 AD)[7] and they will not become limbs of the body of the Church of Christ. Thus, the disgrace caused by such heresy will be made to disappear by the method I adopt, and I shall escape the condemnation of having gone over to their side.[8]

Gregory the Great (540-604 AD) sees Paul’s calling out the Galatians for being so foolish, is because it appeared that having begun in the Spirit, they were now claiming to be perfect through the works of the flesh. But the faults of those who are ashamed he reprimands as though sympathizing with them, saying, rejoiced in the Lord greatly, that now at the last you have succeeded again in wanting to care for me, as indeed you do care, even though an opportunity to do so was lacking.[9] Paul did this says Gregory so that hard scolding might uncover the faults of those who have turned away from the truth, and a milder scolding to somewhat hide the negligence of those who were still faithful, even though there were unstable in their faith.[10]

As Chrysostom sees it, after having established himself as a trustworthy teacher, Paul now speaks with great authority in comparing the Law and Faith. Having chided these foolish Galatians earlier for having departed so quickly from his teachings,[11] he questions their capability to comprehend what he told them about the Anointed One dying on the cross since before their very eyes he clearly portrayed Yeshua the Messiah as having been put to death as a criminal! In doing this, says Chrysostom, Paul does not transgress the Anointed One’s law, which forbids calling his brother a fool.[12] No one deserved more to be called foolish than the Galatians after hearing and seeing so many great things they still held onto their former Jewish ways as though nothing happened!

Then Chrysostom asks since the Anointed One was not crucified in Galatia but in Jerusalem, what did Paul mean by this phrase “before whose eyes?” The answer, he was illustrating the power of faith, which is able to see even those things far off. And he said not “crucified” but “portrayed as crucified,” showing that with the eyes of faith they saw more accurately than those who were there and witnessed the events. This was said in an attempt to both reprimand and to commend them. He praises them for having listened to his messages with enthusiasm but reprimands them because, having seen the Anointed One stripped, crucified, nailed, spat on, mocked, drinking vinegar, insulted by thieves, and pierced with a spear, they forsook Him with such haste in order to run to the law. How could they not be moved by seeing the Anointed One suffering on their behalf?[13]

And in another one of his homilies, Chrysostom points out that although Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem, not in Galatia, still they were able to see the events from a distance. That’s because they were looking at the scene of the crucifixion Paul displayed for them through their spiritual eyes. Says Jerome, “They saw more distinctly than some who were present as spectators.” As such, the Galatians became eye-witnesses by faith. It is sad that rather than what Paul said to them about their seeing the crucifixion was expressed as praise, it was, unfortunately, placing blame on their lack of faith and dismissal of the Anointed One’s death on the cross on Mount Calvary as less important than Moses’ receiving the Ten Commandments on Mount Horeb in the wilderness of Sinai.[14]

[1] 1 Corinthians 1:23-24

[2] Ibid. 2:2

[3] Galatians 3:1

[4] 1 Corinthians 3:3

[5] Tertullian, Part 2, Bk. 1, A Treatise on the Soul, Ch. 27, p. 462

[6] Arianism in the doctrine of Christ the Anointed One, is that Jesus, as the Son of God, was created by God. It was proposed early in the 4th century by the Alexandrian presbyter Arius and was popular throughout much of the Eastern and Western Roman empires, even after it was denounced as a heresy by the Council of Nicaea (325).

[7] Marcellus of Ancyra was a staunch opponent of the Arians. St. Epiphanius observes, that there was a great deal of dispute with regard to the real tenets of Marcellus; but as to his followers, it is evident that they did not own the three hypostases; for Marcellus considered the Son and Holy Ghost as two emanations from the divine nature, which, after performing their respective offices, were to return again into the substance of the Father; and this opinion is altogether incompatible with the belief of three distinct persons of the Godhead.

[8] Basil of Cæsarea: Letter to Petrus, Bishop of Alessandria, Letter 266, pp. 676-678

[9] Cf. Philippians 4:10

[10] Gregory the Great, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 12, The Book of Pastoral Rule, Part 3, Ch. 7, p. 539

[11] Galatians 1:6

[12] Matthew 5:22

[13] Chrysostom: Homily on Galatians, op. cit., Edwards, M. J. (Ed.)., p. 35

[14] Chrysostom: The Complete Works of St. John Chrysostom, (Kindle Location 64083)