Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCH

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson VII)

I like the way Bible scholar Walter F. Adeney (1849-1920) defines apostolic authority, especially in the Apostle Paul’s case. For him, apostolic authority must be conferred. It does not originate in the person who possesses it. They are “sent,” a messenger, a missionary, an ambassador. As the prophet is the man who “speaks for” God, a Divine spokesperson, so the Apostle is the one sent by the Lord, the messenger of Jesus the Anointed One. Thus the apostolic authority is very different from that of the philosopher which depends entirely on his own intellectual powers, and that of the religious founder which grows out of the man’s own spiritual ideas, and all purely personal authority. It is derived from the authority of the Anointed One. Natural gifts can no more make a man an apostle than they can give a legionnaire the right to command a national army.¹

A funny story was told to me on one of my visits to churches in Yugoslavia back in the late 1960s. It seems that Bishop Pavlov Milivoj heard of a gentleman who was introducing himself as an Ordained Bishop of the same denomination, but someone Bishop Milivoj never heard of. So he went to visit him. When the man was asked when, where, and by whom was he ordained, the man pointed to a picture of a well-known American healing evangelist on the wall. The man said that after he got the picture, he placed it on his head and prayed a prayer of ordination. I wonder if one might be able to do that with a picture of the President of the United States?

Methodist scholar G. G. Findlay (1849-1919) believes Paul knew about the qualifications for one to be named an Apostle, that they must be a witness to the resurrected Lord.² His coming into the ranks of the Apostles was the most unusual of all the Apostles. It did not involve the voice of a man summoning him out of the ranks of his former enemy, the Church, to become a servant of the Anointed One. It was not an earthly teacher who gave him the message he was to proclaim the Gospel to those despised by the Jews – the Gentiles. Nevertheless, both in Damascus and Jerusalem his calling was acknowledged and gracefully welcomed into their Christian fellowship.

Then again, it wasn’t the church in Jerusalem who sent him out as a missionary, but the church in Antioch, Syria, telling him to go in the power of the Holy Spirit on their behalf to the regions beyond their borders. But this was not his first calling, nor the one to which he looked for validation of being chosen by God to be His elect servant to carry the Gospel to the world. Yet there were those who disputed his claim that he was an Apostle because no hands were laid on him in Jerusalem announcing such an ordination. But to his critics, he gave only one answer: “I am an apostle because I have seen the risen Savior our Lord Jesus the Anointed One!”³

There was no doubting that the signs of a true Apostle were seen in him and his ministry. No other Apostle performed more miracles than he. No other Apostle persuaded more souls to follow the Anointed One than he. Every moral and spiritual quality of a true minister of God were equal to all the others. And for the exercise of his ministry, he was responsible neither to “those of repute” at Jerusalem nor to his censures at Corinth. Only to the Anointed One did he bow in submission as the one he should follow and emulate.⁴ I wonder how many of us were considered as qualified for the ministry using the same criteria as that the Apostle Paul faced?

But why does Paul say that he was sent by God the Father and Jesus the Anointed One whom God raised from the dead? Because it wasn’t the dead Jesus they carried to the grave that he saw, but it was the risen Jesus that appeared to him. It was this revelation that stopped him in his tracks before he reached Damascus, and at the same moment convinced him that Jesus has risen, that he himself was called to be His servant. These two convictions were inseparably linked in Paul’s recollections. As surely as God the Father raised His Son Jesus from the dead and glorified Him in heaven with the position of being at His right hand, so surely did this glorified Jesus revealed Himself to Saul His persecutor to make him His Apostle. He was, not less a true Apostle than Peter or John, as witnesses of His resurrection. Being a witness to the Resurrected Anointed One was the key principle in anyone’s qualification for Apostleship.⁵

Kenneth Wuest (1893-1961), notes something in verse one that was part of the Apostle Paul’s vision that should be a part of our world scope as well. For Wuest, Paul conceived that his apostleship was related to the Church universal, and thought of Christianity as an organic whole, not simply isolated centers of effort.⁶ By looking at it that way, Paul could see how his divine appointment related to it. Wuest also points out that the Greek noun apostolos, is a combination of two words. “apo,” meaning “from” and “stello,” meaning “to send.” This should give us a clear word picture that as ministers, teachers, or laymen, we are sent from God out into the world. As such, this refers to the act of sending someone on a mission to represent the sender. Says Wuest, our English word ambassador would be a good translation. Therefore, the word “apostle” as Paul uses it here does not merely refer to someone who has a message to announce, but to an appointed representative with an official status who is provided with the credentials of their office which is the Holy Spirit.⁷

Robert H. Gundry (1932), American Bible scholar who studied under British professor F. F. Bruce in Manchester, England, and wrote his commentary during my own early ministry years, gives his reason why Paul worded his opening this way. Bruce notes that Paul puts “Jesus the Anointed One” ahead of “God the Father” because he has in mind Jesus the Anointed One’s commissioning him to apostleship in connection with his appearance as Paul was traveling on the road to Damascus.⁸ By saying “Who raised Him, Jesus the Anointed One, from among the dead,” Paul describes God in view of the circumstance that like the twelve Apostles, Paul’s apostolic commissioning occurred after Jesus’ resurrection.

Also, God was pleased to reveal His Son to Paul in order that he could proclaim the Gospel among the Gentiles. Paul includes “God the Father” with “Jesus the Anointed One” as the source of his apostleship and thus doubles his apostolic authority. Because of the placement of God and His Son in 1:15–16, here in 1:1 “God the Father” refers to God as the Father of the just-mentioned “Jesus the Anointed One,” though Paul will shortly widen God’s fatherhood to include Christian believers.⁹ The pairing of Jesus the Anointed One with God the Father, the designation of Him as God’s Son, and the further designation of Him as “our Lord” in verse three imply the deity of Jesus the Anointed One.¹⁰ In other words, Paul wanted to make sure everyone understood that when Jesus called him and sent him out, the Father was in total agreement.

Paul’s affirmation of his divine appointment should encourage us to confirm our own divine calling. We may not all be considered apostles, or evangelists, or even teachers, but we are all given work to do by God’s special assignment. If we view our work as just another position in the church instead of a calling, we will soon be discouraged. But if by faith we see that God gave us work to do for Him, we can overcome even the most difficult obstacles. All work is sacred if it has been given to us by God. That’s why Paul was able to endure through all the hardships and persecutions he faced.

I like what Vincent Cheung writes about the importance of having a divine call to the ministry. For him, there is a lesson here on how Christians should respect their ministers and how ministers should regard themselves. He notes, that although denominational ordinations, seminary degrees, and apprenticeships under approved mentors often have something to do with the spiritual equipping of a minister and could add to their credibility in the eyes of others, credentials from a denomination can never impart the authority and power that comes from a divine calling. If any minister thinks that they are authorized to preach because they have received credentials hanging on the wall of their office, what happens when they face a congregation that belongs to another denomination, and especially one that rejects the authority of his own denomination? Lack of credentials alone do not undermine a person’s ministry, but it is their conscious reliance on credentials that is self-defeating.¹¹

As one Jewish commentator points out, this was intended to show that God’s power and authority surpass those of any human organization and that Yeshua’s power and authority did not cease when He died.¹² Another Jewish commentator notes that Paul’s designation of the recipients in Greek as ekklēsia (which means “assembled brethren”), was done to distinguish them from the synagogai where the non-messianic Jews gathered.¹³ So it clearly shows that by this time, the Gospel was no longer being preached solely in synagogues as before. Jewish theologian W. Adriaan Liebenberg tells us that Paul was sent to Galatia to spread the truth to his Israelite brothers and sisters about the Scriptures by the Messiah and His Father, God Almighty. Galatia literally means “the Exiles of YaH.” The Hebrew root for the Greek word “Diaspora” is Galut. That’s how we get the Hebrew term GalutYaH (Galatia). According to Peter,¹⁴ these were the Chosen People of the Dispersion (Ten-Tribes) scattered through modern Turkey and the former area of Aremea.¹⁵

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCH

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson VI)

So it doesn’t matter what the church may say or do, says Arminius, she can do nothing to add any weight to this authority because she owes her existence to His word from which she has been given her own authority. She is not a true church unless she has openly declared her faith in what’s written here by Paul as being divinely inspired and seeks to obey it. Because of this, any effort to suspend the authority of the Scriptures over the church is to deny that God has all authority and supreme power and that this testimony allows her to exist as a true church.¹ So what Arminius is pointing out is that Paul is claiming the same authority for his ministry. And unless it can be proven that anything he is saying is false or out of line with God’s word, then his message must be accepted as having God’s approval. If it was true in Paul’s day, and Arminius’ day, it must surely be true on our day.

British Reformer Matthew Poole (1624-1679) makes clear the need for recognizing Jesus as the Messiah as Paul states here in verse one. After Jesus the Messiah was sent by God to earth to bring the Good News of His plan of salvation, and it was this same Jesus the Messiah that sent Paul out into the world to preach this good news to all nations, not just to the Jews. So he too was bringing the message of the Messiah. While the non-Jews were open to tidings of good news, many of his fellow Jews were incensed that anyone could claim to be walking in the footsteps of the Messiah without their being involved in their selection. And to show that he was not a lone nonconformist who escaped the prison of the Jewish Rabbis interpretation of the Torah, Paul includes the names of his fellow well-known believers in the Messiah who in allowing him to do so were thereby endorsing his message to the churches in Galatia.²

Johann Bengel (1687-1752 AD) sees a notable contrast here in the way Paul asserts his Apostleship and divine calling. First, it did not come from a human agency but a divine encounter. Secondly, most receive instruction from one teacher to many followers. Therefore, Paul’s teaching by the authority of the Anointed One fits that mode, because the Anointed One was his only Teacher.³ Then Evangelist John Wesley (1703-1791 AD) goes a little further by noting that not only was Paul’s calling not due to any “men,” but his instructions were not due to any “man.” Jesus the Anointed One, the Son of the Living God was his teacher.⁴

In his history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon (1737-1794 AD), points out that many ancient writers ascribe the destruction of the Roman monuments to the Goths (Galatians) and the Christians. But they neglected to look into what hostile principle they were motivated by and how if they even possessed the time and the means to satisfy such hostility.⁵ In a footnote, we read that it goes without saying that on the subject of Galatia, Sir Charles Fresne of Cange (1610-1688), was a distinguished French philologist and historian of the Middle Ages, his history is accurate and full. He describes the inhabitants of Galatia as being so vain and ignorant, that they deserved what the Apostle Paul said about them in his Epistle to them as being “stupid.”⁶

One of the great Bible scholars of the Wesleyan revival period, Adam Clarke (1760-1832 AD), sees why Paul was so adamant in making sure the Galatians, as well as the false teachers, knew that His calling came directly from the Anointed One. He points out that the believers there in Galatia knew that James was the president of the Apostolic Council in Jerusalem and that Peter was the one to whom the keys to the kingdom of heaven were entrusted. But he wanted them to see that One higher than both James and Peter was the Anointed One who called and sent him to them with the Gospel.⁷ This then set the bar higher than the ecclesiastical authority that existed in Jerusalem or even Antioch in Syria. So if they were having a problem with Paul’s credentials, take it to Jesus and see what He says, not to Jerusalem for their comments.⁸

Some years later Catholic scholar George Haydock (1774-1849 AD) shares what he feels is important about Paul receiving his calling, mission, and Gospel directly from God through the Anointed One. In doing so, Paul was attempting to show the equality of the Son with the Father; also, to destroy another objection of the Arians,⁹ who pretended that the Father, always named first, never the Son, making the Father as rightly God. Furthermore, another of their arguments to prove only the Father was truly God, was that here in verse one He is called “God “the” Father, using the Greek article “tou.” But Jesus was called “the” Son, with the same Greek article. So this cannot be misinterpreted as making the Son a second class member of the Godhead. In addition, they also pretended that the Son was not God, because the Father was said to deliver Him to death. Yet, here in verse three, the Son is said to give and deliver himself.¹⁰ So we can see how important Paul’s letter was to the Galatians, not only for their day and age but up to the present time.

James Haldane (1768-1862), brother to Robert Haldane, notices a parallel between Moses and Jesus and how the teachings they were given existed in part with more to come. Neither Moses nor the Anointed One fully explained the doctrine which they taught, as founders of other religions did. They indicated that the full development of their doctrine would be seen in the future. For Haldane, this is one argument in favor of their teachings having come from God. The prophets certainly were inspired to add more depth to some of what Moses said, just as the Apostles were chosen to do the same for the Gospel. That’s why Paul was so eager to point out that the Anointed One explained His Gospel to him more fully. That’s why he journeyed around to share what the Anointed One gave him.¹¹

John Brown (1800-1874) mentions that it was common among Roman citizens to give their children a nickname in addition to their personal name and family name. The nickname often referred to their appearance or some characteristic, or even a remarkable event in the history of the individual. Brown suggests that it is not unlikely that “Sha’ul” of Tarsus received the Latin name of “Paulus” as a nickname due to his “weak bodily appearance. According to church writer, Terence, Paul was of very small stature.¹² This may also account for some of Paul’s apprehension about his appearance when he went into Galatia. It was easy for his talking tough in his letters, but what about walking tall when he was there in person?

To say that Paul’s calling was unique is an understatement. Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892) describes Paul as being so intensely desirous that the Galatians should understand that he was no mere repeater of other men’s doctrines, but that what he taught he received directly from God by supernatural revelation. They knew that he once was one a fanatical opposer of the Gospel. Indeed, he was a man of such great determination that, whatever he did he did with all his might. So, no sooner did God reveal the Anointed One to him, so that he knew Jesus to be the Messiah, than he earnestly sought to learn yet more of the truth, not by going up to the Apostles at Jerusalem to borrow from them, but by getting alone in the arid plains of Arabia. There, by thought and meditation upon the Word and direct communion with God, he learned yet more concerning the divine mysteries God wanted to reveal.¹³

Edward Huxtable (1833-1893) parses what Paul says here in verse one that is important to keep in mind about how Paul received the revelation of the Gospel. He introduces himself as Paul, an apostle – sent not from men nor by a man, but through Jesus the Anointed One and from God the Father, who raised Jesus from the dead. These prepositions point to the primary fountain of it being delegated by the medium through which it was conveyed to Paul. The necessity for this twofold negation arose from the fact that the word “apostle,” was frequently applied by Christians to messengers deputized by Churches, or, some important representative officer of the Church, whether on a mission for the preaching of the Gospel or for the discharge of matters of church business connected with the Christian Communities far and wide. Paul himself frequently served both these forms of apostleship, as commissioned by the Church in Antioch to carry abroad the message of the Gospel, and also later to go around between Churches on errands of charity. None of which would have happened were it not for his calling by God and commission to preach the Gospel by the Anointed One as delivered to him by the same One who called and the same One who commissioned him.¹⁴

Methodist scholar Joseph A Beet (1840-1924, says that Paul’s apostleship was through the agency of the Anointed One is self-evident. However, it was also through God the Father which requires further explanation. This is given in the words, “who raised Him from the dead.” These words stand boldly in the first verse of the Epistle and reveal the importance in Paul’s thought of this great fact and its essential connection to his mission as an Apostle. It was by the risen Savior that Paul was sent. If the Anointed One did not rise from the dead, Paul would have heard no voice on the way to Damascus. And, if the Apostles were not sent out to preach, the resurrection of the Anointed One would have been without value. Therefore, by raising the Anointed One through His own immediate power and without any human agent, God was Himself personally taking part in the mission of the Apostles. Paul thus begins his letter of rebuke by bringing his readers into the presence of the infinite power of God as manifested on earth through His Son who gave Paul his commission to the Gentiles.¹⁵

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCH

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson V)

In another section of the Jewish Mishnah, we find that these individuals sent out by the Sanhedrin were called “messengers of the court.” As such, wherever they went into cities and synagogues they would identify themselves as “messengers of the court.” In other words, they brought a message on behalf of the court which they represented. They would then call out the name of the one whose name was attached to the house where the people met who vowed that they were performing the rites exactly as they were instructed to do. How true this must be of any church that identifies themselves as Christians. No assembly of believers wants to be known as true followers of the Anointed One whose name they use to identify themselves and not be doing exactly as He instructed them to do.

This also applied to the High Priest in the Temple when he placed the incense on the fire only after entering the Holy of Holies and did not change anything that Moses prescribed.¹ Obviously, Paul did not want to be seen as the puppet of some higher ecclesiastical power within the church, but as a divinely called and commissioned voice of the Gospel to Gentiles and Jews alike. In keeping with that definition of “apostle,” today’s missionaries come closest to fulfilling that ministry. Furthermore, what makes Paul’s claim of being an apostle so potent is that he not only heard the risen Savior speak but repeated what he heard without changing a thing. That’s why his Gospel message to everyone was the same in every place.

This allowed Paul to say that he came with God-given authority and an Anointed One-centered message.² Here he makes the distinction between his calling and his credentials. No matter what organization or denomination or church you practice your ministry with, they do not define you. Your calling from God defines you as one of His apostles. I’ve actually met pastors who were not in complete harmony with their denomination’s teachings but were afraid to make it known for fear of losing their ministerial license and endorsement. In addition, just in case the Judaizers weren’t sure about accepting Jesus as the Anointed One, he wanted them to know that the God they did believe in actually raised this Jesus from the dead. In other words, say what you will about me not being an apostle, says Paul, or what you think about Jesus not being the Messiah, but how will you explain that to your God who claims us both.

Another early commentary on Galatians, Haimo of Auxerre (840-870 AD), a member of the Benedictine Abbey in the Roman Catholic Church of Saint-Germain d’Auxere in Paris.³ adds to this understanding. He notes that there are four types of Apostles. First, there are the ones who are called and not sent neither by human authority but by God alone. Among this sort were Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and a great many other prophets, but not all were prophets. This type included even Apostles sent by the Anointed One, the man who, while a human being, was still true God. The second is certainly from God but through a human being, such as Joshua, who, by God’s will was sent through Moses.⁴ There are many others who, again in keeping with God’s will, were chosen through a popular vote on account of their meritorious life. In these instances, therefore, the will of God and the will of the people coincided. The third sort is by human beings alone and not by God, as when some are chosen based upon the favor they won with people rather than their spiritual calling. Fourth, there are those who pay to take another’s place in the priestly ranks, of whom Saint Ambrose said, “O Bishop, you surely would not be a bishop today if you did not pay a hundred gold coins!”⁵

Another thing of importance is that Paul was quick to include the fact that God raised Jesus from the dead. In another Medieval commentary by Bruno the Carthusian (1030-1101 AD), a German monk who founded the Carthusian order. Pope Urban II was one of his pupils. Bruno was renown for his learning and his holy living. We read in his commentary about what was so important that Paul mentioned God the Father as the One who raised Jesus from the dead. He believes that if there were some way God the Father could have justified human beings through the Law, then He would not have wanted His Anointed One to die in vain. Yet, because God saw that the Law was powerless, He excluded the Law as a means for salvation so that it could be accomplished only through the work of the Anointed One.⁶

Then, medieval English scholar Robert of Melun (1100-1167 AD), gives us a little background on what was known about this teaching in his day. He discovered that the Apostle Paul addresses this Epistle to those who crossed into Greece from Gaul and were first called Gallogræcia by the Greeks themselves. Thereafter, they were called Galatians on account of their white bodies, while their province was known as Galatia. Furthermore, because these people were not well educated, the Greeks always labeled them as ignorant. Nevertheless, the Apostle went to convert them to having faith in the Anointed One for salvation. But unfortunately, they seemed to be falling back into spiritual ignorance again.

They were now allowing themselves to be led into error by false apostles and so believed that they needed to keep the Law as well as the Gospel on the grounds that apart from the Law the Gospel was insufficient for salvation. In fact, he said the same to the Romans, though not so subtly, because the Galatians were not as competent in understanding. Even as the subject matter of this Epistle clearly pertains to the particular situation of the Galatian church, it is still a situation common to every church. The Apostle’s intention, therefore, is to rectify their error by showing them that the Gospel is all they need. As such, he gets their attention by announcing his message and the power of that message, as well as his own authority as an Apostle. He prayed that this would persuade the Galatians to come back to the Gospel they first received from him.⁷

Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274 AD) makes an interesting comment at this point and says something I’m sure the Apostle Paul would agree with wholeheartedly. It gives us some insight into how the medieval church viewed the relationship between the teachings of Jesus in the Final Covenant and what is found in the First Covenant. Aquinas believes that Paul wrote the Galatians this epistle to emphasize that the coming of free grace through the Final Covenant made the legality of the First Covenant no longer necessary as their gospel. The truth of the Gospel replaced the symbolism of the Law. And when grace and truth were combined, a person can then go on to everlasting life and glory. But this can only be accomplished when observance of salvation through the Law is abandoned, and the ceremonial precepts of the Old Law were replaced by a fervent reverence for the Gospel of Jesus the Anointed One.⁸

As Reformist Martin Luther (1483-1546 AD) pointed out, we must also remember that Paul wrote this epistle because he was upset that after he left this area, false teachers moved in who perverted the Gospel that he preached on man’s free justification through grace and faith in the Anointed One Jesus. Luther also makes another point, he felt that the world’s grudge against the Gospel was because the Gospel condemns the religious wisdom of the world. And since the world is jealous over its own religious views, they, in turn, charge the Gospel with being a radical and discriminatory doctrine, a doctrine to be persecuted as the worst plague on earth. As a result, we have this paradoxical situation: The Gospel supplies the world with salvation through Jesus the Anointed One, peace of conscience, and every blessing. Yet the world despises the Gospel for that very reason.⁹

This led fellow Reformer John Calvin (1509-1564 AD) to declare we should always keep this in mind: that through our guide the Holy Spirit the Body of the Anointed One should listen to God alone, and to Jesus the Anointed One whom He appointed to be our teacher through the Holy Spirit.¹⁰ Therefore, anyone who assumes the position of preacher, teacher, or prophet, must speak to us in the name of God or of the Anointed One. But he also made an interesting comment on Paul’s contention that his apostleship was not conferred on him by any man. To some degree, this raised a problem. How could Paul claim that he was not called by men, while Luke records that Paul and Barnabas were called by the church at Antioch? He then explains.¹¹

Some have replied, says Calvin, that he previously discharged the duties of an Apostle, and that, consequently, his apostleship was not founded on his appointment by that church. But here, again, an objection would be proper because the reason he was sent out was to go to the Gentiles, among whom the Galatians were counted. It would be more correct to understand that Paul did not intend here to entirely dismiss the calling of that church, but merely to shew that his apostleship came from a higher source. This is true; for even those who laid their hands on Paul at Antioch did so, not of their own accord, but in obedience to the express will of the Holy Spirit.¹² When it comes to those accepted as preachers, teachers, and apostles in the church, Calvin indicates that while their individual calling may be unique, they all share one thing in common with the Apostle Paul: “One cannot faithfully perform the duties of their office unless they are called by God.”¹³

Dutch theologian Jakob Arminius (1560-1609), who followed in the footsteps of John Calvin and was an important participant in the Reformation Movement in Holland, was discussing the authority of sacred Scripture. For him, the authority of the Word of God lies both in the truthfulness of the whole text, and in all its declarations, whether they be those about things past, things present, or things to come. Also, in the power of the commands of what to do or not to do in order to follow God’s divine word and will. All such of authority can depend on no other than on God Himself, who is the principal author of His Word, both because He is truth without any suspicion of what He said to be false, and because He is of unbeatable power. Because of this, understanding that His word is divine is a must in our belief system and obedience to what He said. It must also be so strongly ingrained in us that this our obedience cannot be increased or decreased by any other authority.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCH

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson IV)

Now early church scholar Cassiodorus (485-580 AD) tells us that when Paul calls himself an Apostle by a divine calling through the Anointed One, Jesus, it was his way of challenging those who depended solely on human authority for styling themselves as Apostles. The churches in Galatia at that time were being thrown into turmoil by false preachers. But Paul wants them to know through his greeting, along with all the brethren who are with him, that he is a friend, not a foe. That’s why in his greeting he also blesses them. This was to make them feel comfortable in receiving the instructions from the Word of the Lord in order to help them become more established in their faith.¹

A well-known Roman author and naturalist named Pliny the Elder, who lived between 23–79 AD, gives us a description of this area during the same period when Paul traveled throughout this territory. He tells us that inhabitants from France came down to this area and intermarried with the Greeks who lived there, and at first, it was called Gallogræcia, but later became known simply as Galatia. He tells us that the capital city was named Gordium,² and some of the chief towns were Ancyra (today known as Ankara), Tavium (an important trading post and at the crossroads and stopping place on busy caravan routes), and Pessinus (along the banks of the Sakarya River from which the mythological King Midas supposedly came). The churches as we know them from the Bible were in Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. It was possible that some unnamed churches were founded in other surrounding cities.³

These city names sound foreign to us today, but back then they were considered important and good places for churches to be started. Also, such travelers as Pliny the Elder, spelled the names of these cities in Latin, which, when translated into Greek, are spelled differently, and then we have the English transliteration to deal with. I learned how confusing this can be when searching for my paternal home in East Prussia. When my grandfather lived there it was called Klein Dankheim in German. But I wasn’t able to find it on any map until I discovered that after WWI this area was divided between Poland and Germany. Now the name of my grandfather’s birthplace is called Przeździęk Mały in Polish.

Early church theologian Jerome (347-420 AD), does not see Paul speaking here out of pride, rather, to remove any uncertainty or doubt concerning his appointment and commission as the Apostle to the Gentiles. He did this to confound any of those who were alleging that since he was not one of the original twelve apostles or ordained by the elders, he was a false prophet. This might also be taken as aimed indirectly at Peter and the others because the Gospel was committed to him not by the Apostles but by the same Jesus the Anointed One who chose those same Apostles.⁴

One of the earliest preachers of the Gospel who commented on Paul’s letter to the Galatians was John Chrysostom (349-407 AD), Bishop of Constantinople. He noted that Paul’s rhetoric was full of an intense and reverent spirit, and not only the rhetoric but also, so to speak, the whole Epistle. One should always address one’s disciples with mildness, even when they need discipline. Speaking sharply would only pertain to troublemakers and impostors. Our Lord also, though He generally spoke gently to His disciples, here and there uses strong language,⁵ and who was heard to pronounce a blessing one day and a rebuke the next. For instance, having said to Peter, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona,”⁶ and having promised to lay the foundation of the Church upon his confession, shortly afterward He says, “Get yourself behind Me, Satan: you are a stumbling block to Me.”⁷ On another occasion, Jesus asked very sharply of Peter, “Are you still not understanding Me?”⁸

Chrysostom tells us that the fact this Epistle breathes an incensed spirit should be obvious to everyone even on the first reading, but he must explain the cause of Paul’s anger against these believers in Galatia. It could not be something slight and unimportant or he would not have used such sharp words. For to be exasperated by unimportant matters is the weakness of the small-minded, moody, and irritable individual; just as it is a part of the more slow-minded and dull people who quickly lose heart in weighty matters. The Apostle Paul was not like that. So what got him so irritated and upset? It was serious and significant; one which was disorienting them all from the Anointed One. It needed to be confronted face to face.⁹

Chrysostom also believes there may be some to learn when it comes to Paul’s statement that he was called by God and not by men to be the Apostle to the Gentiles. Many commentators think Paul was referring to his encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus. However, Chrysostom points to the occasion in Antioch where Paul was helping to teach, that in one worship service, the Holy Spirit, spoke through one of the prophets and told the church, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” Then after fasting and praying they laid their hands on them and sent them off.”¹⁰

So in Chrysostom’s mind, this was the apostleship that Paul was referring to. In other words, his calling came from God through his meeting the Anointed One on the road to Damascus, but his Apostleship came from God through the Holy Spirit that the church should ordain and support Paul and Barnabas as apostles to the Gentiles. To think of it, would Paul not have been establishing churches in Galatia were it not for that ordination in Antioch?¹¹

In another of the earliest commentaries on Paul’s letter, Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD), who was one of Chrysostom’s contemporaries, shares his impression. For him, the reason that the Apostle writes to the Galatians was to help them understand what it was that God’s grace accomplished for them since they are no longer under the Law. For although the grace of the Gospel was preached to them, there were some from the Jewish believers who still did not grasp the real benefit of grace. Despite being called Christians, they still felt comfortable under the burden of full obedience to the Law that the Lord God imposed not only on those serving righteousness but also on those serving sin. That is, He gave a righteous law to unrighteous people to point out their sins, not take them away. It removes sins only by the grace of faith, which works through love.

Augustine continues by observing that if a person is sent out to preach on the authority of another human being, they cannot be fully trusted to explain the whole mystery of salvation. However, if a person is sent out on the authority God charged another human being to give them, then they will be more trustworthy. This happened with Paul and Barnabas at the church in Antioch in Syria. But Paul wanted the Galatians to know that God Himself sent him, therefore, he can be trusted to be honest and truthful.¹²

Another early church scholar, Cassiodorus (485-580 AD), points out that Paul does not call himself an Apostle commissioned by a council of men, but one who was appointed by Jesus the Anointed One Himself. Paul did not do this to refute any criticism or claims against his authority, but to show the difference between his calling and that of those who came behind him into Galatia with their Judaizing message combining works with grace. And by mentioning that there were others with him who felt the same way, he dispelled any assumption that he was only speaking for himself.¹³

So in the opening verse, Paul sets the theme for the whole epistle: If the original Apostles commissioned him or an agent of the Anointed One was used to give him his commission (as the false teachers in Galatia were alleging), then he would be subordinate to them, and, therefore, under their control. As such, the Judaizers would have then been able to convince the Galatians that Paul was only a yes-man preaching what the original twelve disciples told him to say. As such, he was given no individual authority from Jesus Himself, as he claimed.

In his greeting, the Apostle Paul teaches us a lesson on being real: never pretend to be something you’re not. Don’t put on airs as though you should be treated special because of your pedigree or something special you have to offer. Even when you’re among unbelievers don’t become stuck-up in your holiness, salvation or sanctification. In this salutation, Paul embodies several interesting points: Historically, only those disciples who actually saw the risen Savior, qualified to be called Apostles. Yet Paul identifies himself as an Apostle, but with a qualifier. First, He didn’t claim to have the backing of the original twelve disciples, nor was He writing this letter “on their behalf.” Furthermore, he did not keep it a secret that he knew them, so in case the Galatians refused to accept him for who he was, he could proudly invoke the names of Peter, James, or John to show they accepted him as a fellow Apostle and brother in union with the Anointed One.

The original Greek noun apostolos identifies someone who is sent out as a messenger to teach, in contrast to a mathētēs (“disciple” KJV) who is a student that continually learns from an instructor. In the Orient, masters taught their disciples in the hopes that they might develop into being even better masters than themselves. But in Christianity, a disciple is one who never stops learning because it is impossible to become better than their teacher – Jesus the Anointed One. But Paul was also drawing on his Jewish roots in declaring that he was not sent by any church individual or any council, because according to the teachings of the Rabbis, the Sanhedrin sent out members prior to the festivals into all the surrounding areas to coordinate and approve the proper gathering of the correct grains to be offered, and to do so with great pomp and circumstance.¹⁴

Irish playwright George Barnard Shaw (1856-1950) once said: “People become attached to their burdens sometimes more than the burdens are attached to them.” The truth is when we get so attached to doing everything the way we’ve always done it because of our handicaps, or so absorbed in only looking at things from one perspective because of our lack of exploring new ideas, it limits our growth and maturity. That means we’re holding on tight to excuses that keep us from doing new things, remaining in places we’re familiar with, and to things and the people present in our lives as we grew up, not knowing that all of our attachments will only bring us anguish, sorrow, and suffering. Many can’t seem to grasp the notion that you can love anything without becoming attached to everything.

In my university studies, I was introduced to the writings of the ancient Chinese philosopher and poet, Lao Tzu. In his work titled “Tao Te Ching,” he asked: Can you deal with the most vital matters by letting events take their course? Can you step back from your own biases in order to understand all things? If you can do that, says Lao Tzu, you give birth to new ideas to nourish them, things you can use without owning them, with no expectations, leading and not trying to control: this is the supreme virtue.¹

This is a hard lesson for anyone to learn. But there are some good points about letting up and letting go of things that don’t give us excuses anymore to who we really are, where we need to be, what we should be, and what ought to be trying to do: First, being emotionally attached to your problems leads to cloudy decision making. You’re afraid to try, because it may make matters worse than better. You end up refusing opportunities because you’re afraid the problems you have may get in the way. It’s like a pastor who doesn’t want to offer counseling to couples having difficulty in their marriage because he too is having problems in the same area. He doesn’t realize that the best person to talk to is someone who’s been through, or going through, the same problem.

Secondly, being emotionally attached to your problems leads to unnecessary stress. What would you think of someone who is frustrated because they can’t get the job they want or become involved in some activity because they think that their physical, or mental or emotional status will result in their being turned down? Just think! How many contestants on “Dancing With the Stars” were told that because they were blind, deaf, had an artificial limb, or were overweight that they would not be accepted? Yet they were accepted because they applied. Listen to this. Army veteran J. R. Martinez, who sustained third-degree burns on 37 percent of his body, won the Mirrorball Trophy in Season 13 with his partner Karina Smirnoff. Also, Nyle DiMarco, a deaf model won the Mirrorball Trophy in Season 22 with partner Peta Murgatroyd.

Thirdly, being emotionally attached to your problems causes stunted growth in what you’re trying to do or trying to be. Shark Tank investor Barbra Corcoran also spoke openly about her dyslexia. “It made me more creative, more social and more competitive,” Corcoran said in an interview with Entrepreneur Magazine. “There’s great freedom to being dyslexic… if you can avoid labeling yourself as a loser in a school system that measures people by the As and Bs on their report card.” And double-amputee Paralympic Amy Purdy, who lost her legs to Meningitis at the age of 19, wowed the judges and audience members when partnered with five-time returning champion Derek Hough in Season 18.

Life is a process. We should enjoy the process. Not many people can change the way other people feel. However don’t let your own handicaps or problems get in the way of working together with your spouse, family, workmates, fellow churchgoers, or society in general, it makes life much more enjoyable. So take pride in the battle and grind as you work together to create better experiences for yourself and others. Help your family and friends by becoming more cooperative and make the process fun, for everyone.

The Bible is certainly not silent on this subject. In fact, there is a fabulous story about a young boy who was entrusted by his father to watch their flock of sheep while the older sons conducted other parts of the family business. But then a war broke out when one of their countries arch enemies decided to take over their land. They gathered in a valley between the two countries and it became a standoff because their enemy would parade out their champion warrior who was some nine feet tall and whose helmet, coat of armor, javelin, and shield all together weighed over 200 pounds.

Daily they taunted this boy’s king and army, which included three of his brothers. Their father got worried about them not having enough to eat, so he chose his young son to carry a basket filled with roasted grain, loaves of bread, and cheese to them. Since it was not too far from the village where they lived, this boy would make trips back and forth so he could still watch out for his father’s sheep. On one of these occasions, the boy arrived it looked like a battle was about to begin. So the boy left the basket with the one who kept such supplies and hurried up to the front to see what was happening.

It was at that moment that this champion of the enemy strode out and began to challenge and shame them for being cowards. This is the first time the boy heard such blasphemy against his people. So he turned to some of the soldiers around him and asked, “What would a person get for killing this pagan warrior who is defying the armies of God? Soon word got around about the young boy’s question, and when it reached the ears of his brothers, they got angry. They told him that he had no business being there. “Go back to your sheep,” they told him. We all know how much you brag about defending the sheep against some supposed lion and invisible bear. Get out of here!”

But when word reached the king, he had them bring the boy to him. He looked at the small lad because the king himself was quite tall. He asked the boy sarcastically how he expected to fight this giant when he wasn’t even trained as a soldier? David told him about the lion and the bear and the king felt like there wasn’t much to lose by sending the boy out to battle with the giant. He tried to dress the lad in his own armor, but the boy couldn’t move because the armor was too heavy.

So the boy went back over to where the giant was still ranting and raving. He looked around and found five smooth stones that fit nicely into his sling. Instead of being dissuaded by all the things his brother and others said, and in spite of being untrained and small of stature, he put his shoulders back as everyone on both sides watched as this tiny lad marched toward this huge giant. Their enemies started laughing while his brothers and other soldiers stood watching in horror. But with an accurate shot with his sling and a smooth stone he put it right between the giant’s eyes. This huge monster fell to the ground stunned. The boy quickly ran to the sprawling warrior, with all his might he pulled out the heavy sword, and with one fell swoop cut off the giant’s head. Pandemonium broke out with their enemies turning and fleeing from the scene while the soldiers on the boy’s side started running after them with a great shout.²

The victory was theirs! And all because a little boy refused to let his limitations of being young, untrained, inexperienced in war, whose only weapon was a sling, keep him from doing what he knew in his heart needed to be done. So you must decide whether you are going to be like his brothers and only watch what’s going on because you don’t think you have what it takes to get the job done. You are so hung up on your limitations that you’re afraid to try anything new? Or, do you have the heart of this boy, and in spite of what others think of you, you are still willing to try! – Dr. Robert R Seyda

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCH

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson III)

Paul finishes his awaited response to Nero by telling him that he also taught the assemblies of believers everywhere to reverence the one almighty, invisible, and incomprehensible God. And that this teaching was not something he devised on his own nor was it given to him by men, nor through men, but through Jesus the Anointed One who spoke to him out of heaven, and was the One who also sent him out to preach by sending Ananias of Damascus to tell him what God told him to say, namely, “I have chosen Saul for an important work. I want him to tell other nations, their rulers, and the people of Israel about me.¹”²

According to the History of the Eastern Orthodox Church, it traces its beginnings back to Jesus the Anointed One and the Apostles. The original church or community of the East before the Great Schism comprised the following:

the Greek churches were founded by Saint Paul. the Antiochian and Asia Minor churches were founded by Saint Peter. the Coptic (or Egyptian) churches were founded by Saint Mark (including, at the time, the Ethiopian Empire historically known as Abyssinia. the Syriac (or Assyrian) churches in Upper Mesopotamia grew out of the church in Antioch. the Georgian church, traditionally founded by Saint Andrew and Saint Nino.3 the Armenian church, traditionally founded by Saint Jude and Saint Bartholomew. the church of Jerusalem, founded by Saint James, as well as the churches of Samaria and Judea, together comprising “the Holy Land.” The church of Rome by tradition was founded by both Saint Peter and Saint Paul.4

We also have John Cassian (360-435 AD), a Roman Catholic monk and theologian, in one of the books he wrote against the teachings of Nestorius, the Greek Orthodox Church’s Archbishop of Constantinople and talks about Paul’s writings and how Rome interpreted them one way and Constantinople interpreted them another way. This schism began when the Church began to grow out of the Church in Antioch, the branch that developed in Rome to the west was thought by them as being the official seat of Christianity, and the branch that developed in Constantinople to the east considered itself an equal seat of Christianity. So because of this impasse, they never came to an amicable agreement. It appears that there were some things coming out of Constantinople that were unacceptable to Rome.

Cassian began by comparing the church and heresy to the Greek mythical serpent-like creature known as Hydra. If one of Hydra’s heads was cut off, another one grew in its place. The same seemed to be the case with false teachings in the church. As soon as one was stopped, another false doctrine grew in its place. It was only when a fiery sword was used to cut out its inwards that it finally died. So, says Cassian, it will take the fiery sword of the Holy Spirit to cut out the inward parts of these dangerous heresy’s to end their reproduction power.

But Cassian was not shocked by this any more than a farmer is shocked to find weeds growing in among the seeds he sowed to produce good grains. But he can’t leave them alone to grow because they will take nutrients away from the good grain. He points to the Ebionites who flourished in the earliest part of Christianity. They were so over-anxious to prove the Anointed One’s humanity that they robbed Him of His divinity. Then along came the Roman priest Sabellius who began to teach against the plurality of three persons in the Godhead, followed by Pelagius who taught that Adam’s original sin was not passed on to his children; that the human will as created with its abilities by God, and that it was sufficient to live a sinless life, although he believed that God’s grace assisted every good work necessary to achieve it. So the difficulty Cassian confronted already proved to be a problem with a long history in the church.

But there was good news as well. It seems that a French monk named Leporius, who was one of Pelagius’ staunchest supporters and propagators of his doctrine on original sin and salvation by works and not by grace, finally came under the instruction of Augustine and Aurelius in Alexandria, Egypt. He was enlightened by them to see the error in the doctrine he believed and recanted all that he taught. He was accepted by the church and became a church elder under the guidance of Augustine. Cassian’s point was that while it is not good to be fooled by such erroneous teaching, it is even worse not to convert back to the real faith once you know the truth. So Cassian then makes his statement that true faith believes that Jesus the Anointed One is the Only Begotten Son of the Father and that with the help of the Holy Spirit He took on Himself human flesh to become the Savior of humans. As a result, He died on the cross but was raised back to life by God the Father and ascended into heaven where He now sits waiting for His return and gathers all those who believed in Him to have everlasting life. So we can see that long after the Galatian debacle, false theories still plagued the Church for centuries to follow.

So regardless of other things such as how to conduct baptism, serve communion, and other things, this one doctrine must be accepted by all Christians everywhere in the world. He bases this statement not only on what he is saying or what the Church believes, but he appeals to the Apostle Paul for confirmation of what he said. It appears that Cassian is hinting that one of the heresies he was dealing with was that Jesus the Anointed One was not God, therefore, Mary was only the mother of Jesus, not the mother of God in the flesh. He quotes Paul’s words to Titus, “…while we wait for the blessed hope – the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus the Anointed One.”

No wonder Paul was so shocked that the Galatians turned so quickly away from the Gospel he brought them. How could they see Jesus as only an anointed prophet and not the Son of God? How could they be fed the same garbage fed to them by the Judaizers that, like the head of Hydra, grew back again and again until it was still staring at believers up until Cassian’s time? The idea that salvation can be gained by good works with the Anointed One’s help was still alive. How could they reject the Gospel brought to them by an Apostle who was not sent not from men nor by a man, but by Jesus the Anointed One and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead.⁵ So if it was God who sent His Son into the world to preach the Gospel, and it was His Son who called Paul and sent him out with the blessing of the Holy Spirit to preach the Gospel. The Gospel he preached was not from him or anyone else but God.⁶

That’s why Paul could tell the Corinthians that God was reconciling the world to Himself in the Anointed One, and not that, Paul was also said that the life he now lived in the flesh was the Anointed One living in him. That’s why we all who teach, preach, or witness to others the Word of God and the message that the Holy Spirit gives us is God and the Anointed One speaking through us. That’s why it is so important to be sure that we say what we believe and believe what we say.

One of the earliest commentaries on Galatians (366-384 AD) by Ambrosiaster is quick to point out that Paul quickly inform those who said that since he was not chosen and sent out, like other Apostles who were selected by the original Apostles and sent to churches in order to strengthen them, nor was he like others who were sent by the Jews in order to upset the churches, whom he calls false apostles. Rather, he was sent by the Son of God. By this means, he indicated that he was a good, solid preacher because a person whom God chose was much better than one chosen by men.⁷ This commentator makes a note that by Paul speaking about the Anointed One in this fashion, it’s almost as though Paul did not recognize Jesus as a man, but as God, because He issued His command in God-like fashion and not as a man, and chose whom He wanted by divine assessment, not human reasoning.

This same writer then addresses some errors in his own day. He goes on to note that another reason why Paul insisted that people understand that he was not ordained by some church council, is because some heretics went to Galatia with such a claim and forced the Galatians to be circumcised because they thought that Jesus the Anointed One was only a man. But Paul was sent by Jesus the Anointed One, that is to say, by the one who is both God and man. That is clear from what follows, namely, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead. In saying this he condemned two heresies, that of Mani⁸ and that of Photinus.⁹ Mani denied that Jesus was a man but did not deny that he was crucified. Photinus, on the other hand, did not accept that the Anointed One was God and yet did not dare deny that he came back to life from the dead.¹⁰ So we can see it did not take long after the church began for these false doctrines to spread. It is quite likely that the root of all these heresies can be traced back here to what was being taught to Paul’s converts throughout Galatia by these dubious teachers from Jerusalem.

Early church Bishop Theodoret (393-466 AD) focuses on Paul’s statement that his appointment came from God the Father “through” Jesus the Anointed One, His Son. Paul was not making the Anointed One simply some assistant who was carrying God’s work for Him, but rather that it was the Anointed One who appointed him with the full support of His Father. Paul applied the word “through” to both divine deities, teaching that this usage does not imply any difference of nature or essence. And the phrase “the One who raised Him from the dead” does not hint at any defect in the Son’s divinity, for the suffering happened to the Godhead as a whole, which illustrates the harmony of the Gospel. It was not the Son who bestowed the mystery of His divine incarnation, but the Father Himself is a sharer in this dispensation, as well as the Holy Spirit who came upon Him at His baptism by John the Baptizer.¹¹

EASTER BUNNY IN THE WRONG PLACE

The church door was open at St. Michael’s Episcopal Church in Carmichael, California, with people going in and out, when a young man walked up awkwardly to entrance and handed a piece of paper with a number on it to the person there, “Excuse me,” he said somewhat hesitantly, “I’m here to pick up an Easter basket for my daughter. Am I at the right place?” “Oh, I’m so sorry,” said the person, “but these are not Easter baskets for kids; they’re food baskets for families so that they may have a happier Easter.”

The person who wrote this story was an associate minister who was helping to distribute the baskets to needy families. So to make sure everyone was taken care of they handed out numbers to the recipients that matched the basket they were supposed to receive. Each one contained a full Easter dinner – a whole ham, potatoes, bread, vegetables, and a pie – plus enough staples to help feed a family for a week.

So he asked the young man, “Why don’t you step inside and let me see what I can do?” He looked somewhat disappointed. He shook his head “no,” as he peered over his shoulder. “I can’t…my daughter is waiting for me in the car,” he said. He gave her a little wave and turned back toward the associate minister. “I’m grateful for the food, but when I heard you were giving away baskets for Easter…well, I thought they would be Easter baskets for children,” he continued. “I promised my daughter one.” He glanced over his shoulder again. “I left her in the car because I wanted to surprise her.”

The minister felt the young single father’s disappointment but there was nothing he could do. Volunteers put the food baskets together, not Easter ones. So the young man turned to leave. But the minister asked him to wait just a moment, and I walked inside where the baskets were waiting for pick up. He started looking around for the basket with the number on it that matched the one the young father handed him.

Before he could start looking at the numbers, a bulge in one of the baskets caught his eye. What is that? he wondered. Leaning in and looking more closely, he could see, unmistakably, an Easter basket – filled with an assortment of candy and Easter eggs – wrapped with ribbons and tucked inside with the food. One of the volunteers must have added this by mistake! he thought. Then I looked at the man’s number in my hand. Well, I’ll be! The minister said to himself.

As he walked back to the door, he handed the young Happy Easter,” he said to the man, handing him the only bigger food basket with a smaller Easter basket inside – the very basket with his number on it. He smiled and said to the young father, “Someone knew just what you needed.” Yes, someone sure did.

That’s the way life is sometimes. We go to God for something we need and God tells us He didn’t prepare the thing we are asking for. But because we have faith in the One who never fails, sure enough, he not only gives us what we need but also the very thing we were asking for. Why? Does He want to spoil us! No! When we get something from God we were hoping for but that God said it’s not really what He wanted to give us, it’s because He’s trying to teach us a lesson. His Son Jesus told us to seek first the Kingdom of Heaven and all these other things will be given to us.

That’s why Jesus’ coming out of the grave alive was a surprise to all His followers and disciples. They had been wanting a Prince Warrior who would free them from Roman rule and make Israel a free place again. What they got was a wonderful miracle-worker with great compassion for the needy. But when they saw Him alive, they knew that now had a Risen Savior to rescue those who were lost in their sins. But he was that Prince Warrior who conquered sin, satan, death, and the grave.

So on this Easter Sunday, we should not only sing praises to Jesus as our Risen Lord and Savior but also as our Prince of Peace and Royal King or overcoming death and the grave and pay honor to Him for His passion and courage! – Dr. Robert R Seyda

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCH

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson II)

There were others who spent time examining these citizens of the Roman province of Galatia to learn more about them. For instance, Lucius Lactantius (250-326 AD), a Christian writer and adviser to Roman Emperor Constantine (306-337 AD) on religious policies, in his third volume to former Roman Emperor Probus (232-282 AD) on the subject of the Gauls shares what his investigation found. From his research, the inhabitants of this area were from ancient times called Galatians, because of their “white skin.” In fact, an early Greek writer of oracles named Sibyl cited the Galatians and told how gold collars decked “their milk-white necks.” It is plain that from this the province became known as Galatia, in which, on their arrival, the Gauls united themselves with Greeks which led to that region being called “Gallogræcia,” and afterward Galatia. In fact, some Roman historians believe that the forefathers of the Galatians were Celts from the north who moved to that area to get away from the harsh winters.¹ So it was their descendants to whom Paul came to preach the Gospel of Jesus the Anointed One. But it does not mean that all Galatians where direct descendants of the Celts. This should help us better understand what Paul dealt with concerning Gomer’s descendants.

In light of what Paul said about being sent as an ambassador to the Gentiles to proclaim the Good News that the Messiah, Yeshua of Nazareth, already arrived, Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, makes note of an incident that is very relevant to what Paul did as an ambassador of Jesus the Anointed One. He points to the treatment of Jews, as well as Gentiles, by Arabs of his day, and calls it “an instance of the grossest wickedness.” It involved Jewish ambassadors being beheaded by the Arabs while the Gentiles protested, calling them sacred emissaries that should never be assaulted.² And for ourselves, says Josephus, we learned from God our most outstanding doctrines and the most holy part of our Law. They were brought to us by angels (or ambassadors). This name “ambassador” brings the knowledge of God to all mankind and has enough respect to reconciling enemies one to another.³ In other words, messenger bringing the Gospel should be treated as an ambassador from God.

Early church scholar, Ignatius of Antioch (50-117 AD), who may have known Paul personally, says of the Apostle that this ministry was given to him for the benefit of many, “not from himself, neither by men, nor through boastfulness,” but by the love of God the Father, and the Lord Jesus the Anointed One. Ignatius was also struck with admiration by Paul’s ability to accomplish more by saying little than those who were unable to do anything in spite of their conceited talk. He found Paul in harmony with the commandments of God, even as the harp is with its strings. That impressed Ignatius so much that he became convinced that Paul’s thinking was completely in harmony with God’s will, knowing that what Paul said he meant, and that he believed what he said. That Paul could be trusted to remain calm despite what he faced, followed the example of the infinite meekness of the Living God.⁴ The wording makes it clear that Ignatius must have read this epistle of Paul to the Galatians.

Another early church scholar, Polycarp (69-156 AD), a disciple of the Apostle John and the Bishop of Smyrna, used Paul’s epistle to the Galatians in his own epistle to the Philippians by writing: May the God and Father of our Lord Jesus the Anointed One, and Jesus the Anointed One Himself, who is the Son of God, and our everlasting High Priest, build you up in faith and truth, and in all meekness, gentleness, patience, long-suffering, faithfulness, and purity;⁵ and may He bless you with a place among His saints, including all of us and on all that are under heaven, who believe in our Lord Jesus the Anointed One, and in His Father, who raised Him from the dead.⁶ So what Paul is writing here was known early on in the church and respected as the writings of a revered and respected Apostle.

Also, early church writer Tertullian (155-240 AD), follows the same theme by noting that when Paul wrote to the Roman Church, he gave thanks to God through our Lord Jesus the Anointed One. This is consistent with Paul’s joining Jesus the Anointed One and God the Father together in a mutual mission. This comes after Tertullian pointed out that the Apostle Peter used these same words for the same effect.⁷ The Apostle John also calls anyone a liar who denies that Jesus is the Anointed One. By doing so, they reveal the spirit of antichrist in denying the Father and the Son.⁸ That’s why he exhorts us to believe in the name of the Father’s Son, Jesus the Anointed One. John’s effort involved encouraging all believers to develop the same spirit of fellowship among themselves that the Father enjoys with His Son Jesus the Anointed One.⁹

Later on, early church African scholar Marius Victorinus (280-355 AD) believes that not only did Paul insist that his call to the ministry came “through” the Anointed One with the full consent of His Father in heaven, but that it was the Anointed One whom the Father “raised from the dead.” Paul knew that people were being told that he was not a follower of Jesus the Anointed One while He lived on earth, in fact, he persecuted the followers of the Anointed One. So he expected the question, “How did you learn from the Anointed One that He was calling you?” To this, he stood ready to reply that he spoke to the Anointed One after His resurrection. And since God the Father raised Jesus from the dead, this proves that God is also involved in his calling.¹⁰

Early church preacher Chrysostom (349-407 AD), envisions a dialogue between himself and the Apostle Paul about his message in Galatians. “Why is it,” Chrysostom asks Paul, “if it was your wish to convert the Judaizers to the true faith you did not bring it up in those great and illustrious topics which occurred in your Epistle to the Philippians, such as, ‘Who, being in the form of God, counted it not a prize to be on an equal basis with God?’¹¹ Or what you declared afterward to the Hebrews, “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His being?”¹² Or how about what John, one of the sons of thunder,¹³ thundered forth in the opening of his Gospel, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God?”¹⁴ Why didn’t you repeat what Jesus Himself oftentimes declared to the Jews “that His power and authority was equal to the Father’s?”¹⁵ Why did you omit all these, and only make mention of His incarnation, and emphasizing His cross and dying?

Chrysostom imagines that Paul answered him this way: Were I to have addressed my letter to the Judaizers, whom I considered as having blasphemous conceptions of the Anointed One, that way, it would have been a good idea to mention those things. But, since the problem lies with those who fear being punished if they abandon the Law, I thought it best to point out that the Law is no longer needed for salvation. By that I mean, the benefit conferred on every believer through the Cross and the Resurrection is sufficient. If I would have said with the Apostle John that in the beginning was the Word and included what I told the Philippians that even though He shared the same nature with God, He did not consider that something to hold on to, certainly then, says Paul, I would have declared that He was the Divine Word of God in the flesh. But it would have not addressed the problem at hand. The reason I included the statement that God raised Him from the dead was to show the importance of believing in Him that much clearer. That way they now know that the Law can only condemn, it cannot save and promise everlasting life.

Chrysostom imagines Paul also saying to him that people, in general, are less interested in hearing about the majesty of God’s person than learning about the mystery of God’s promise. Certainly, the reverence that comes by recognizing God’s majesty will inspire us to heap praise and worship on Him. But what is there about God that will be of benefit to us humans? I wanted the Galatians to know that their sudden turn away from Grace as the means of salvation in order to earn it, was of no benefit to God. But by doing so, they were removing themselves from receiving all the benefits God promised to those who believe on His Son for salvation.¹⁶

Bible historians also tell us that somewhere between 300-400 AD, a manuscript appeared titled, “Acts of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul,” also known as “The Passion of Peter and Paul.” In the text of this apocryphal document, we find that Paul appeared before Emperor Nero and was asked to answer the charges being brought against him by Simon the Magician. Nero wanted to know who was Paul’s teacher or by whose authority he taught in the cities and what happened as a result of his teachings? Since Paul remained silent up until then, Nero said, “I have the impression that you are not a person with great wisdom and that you were not able to accomplish any work of great consequence.”

Now Paul felt free to respond. Paul explained that he never intended to defend himself against a desperate magician like Simon. After all, he was on his way to hell in a hurry. Who wants to listen to someone pretending to be something they are not. Claiming to have the power of the Holy Spirit to explain his magic tricks.¹⁷ Paul recalled how the Egyptian magicians Jannes and Jambres led Pharaoh and his army astray until they were swallowed up in the Red Sea, so Nero should be aware of this deceiver.

Paul then goes on to tell Nero about the teachings of his Master, Jesus the Messiah. Things that pertained to peace and love, those were the things Paul taught from Jerusalem over to Illyricum. His message always was one of peace. For instance, he taught that in honor they should prefer one another; that those that are rich and famous should not be idolized; not to put their hope in the uncertainty of riches, but to place their hope in God. He taught those who have what the need to be content with the food and covering they already have instead of being envious of those who have more. He taught fathers to teach their children to reverence the Lord God, and to obey their parents. He taught wives to love their own husbands and to respect them as husbands and heads of the house. He also taught masters to treat their slaves with leniency, and slaves to serve their own masters faithfully.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCH

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson I)

BACKGROUND: “History of the Christian Church” writer Phillip Schaff, tells us that the date of the Epistle to the Galatians was being written by Paul between 56–58 AD.¹ Some other scholars believe, however, it was written as early as 49 AD, not long after his visit with the Jerusalem Council and confrontation with Peter in Antioch. He goes on to inform us that his letter to the Galatians, with its sequel, the Epistle to the Romans, discusses the doctrines of sin and redemption and the relationship of the Law and the Gospel. It teaches salvation by free grace and justification by faith, Christian universalism – that all who believe may come, in opposition to Jewish particularism – only those of Jewish ethnicity were allowed in the family of God, and evangelical freedom versus legalistic bondage. Galatians is a rapid sketch written by an Apostle with deep emotions.²

Schaff also summarizes the Epistle to the Galatians in comparison to Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. Romans an elaborate treatise and the mature product of calm reflection. Galatians is an argument against foreign intruders and seducers. Romans is ironical and composed in a serene frame of mind. Galatians rushes along like a mountain torrent and foaming rapids, Romans flows like a majestic river through a boundless prairie and the same river in Galatians that flows along slowly until it reaches a tremendous waterfall.³

Schaff also points out that in verse one we find the main point of the text for the first two chapters: namely, the divine mission and independent apostolic authority of Paul which the Judaizers told the Galatians not to accept, but which is clearly proven by the following narrative and testimony of the older Apostles themselves. One of the criticisms by the Judaizers was that no one possessed independent authority to preach or teach outside the original Apostles. Paul did not have such apostolic limitations and was, therefore, an intruder who did not belong in the presence of such Apostles as Peter and John. But Paul is not intimidated. The One who is over the Church and all Apostles is the One who called and commissioned him to preach the Gospel to the Jews first, and then also to the Gentiles.⁴

1:1-2 This letter is from the Apostle Paul, appointed directly by God the Father who raised Jesus the Messiah from the dead, and not by any one person or by any one group of men, and all the brothers who are with me send their greetings to the congregations throughout the province of Galatia.

So, who are these inhabitants of the southern portion of the Roman province of Galatia? Were they native people to that area? Or did they immigrate to this region from some other country? What racial and ethnic customs did they share with their homeland? And were there any physical or psychological characteristics that made easy to identify? The Apostle Paul most certainly knew most of the answers to these questions. He was born and grew up in the neighboring province of Cilicia in the city of Tarsus. One of the major trade routes of that day ran right through Cilicia and on into Galatia on its way toward Greece. As an apprentice tent maker with his father, he may even have visited this area to sell their products.

We can detect some of this familiarity in Paul’s opening remarks. First, He addresses himself as an Apostle in almost all of his epistles. The only other one to do the same is Peter.⁵ And in the Acts of the Apostles, the original disciples are also called Apostles.⁶ But the writer of Hebrews, who many think was Paul, also calls Jesus an Apostle and High Priest.⁷ So it was not a title to throw around lightly.

We should observe that this opening salutation does not follow the common decorum of starting out with a word of greeting to the recipients of a letter, something he frequently did in his other letters. Rather, he offers his credentials as being the one in authority to write this letter. As such, one can almost hear the stern sound in Paul’s voice as he dictates the letter. Even his greeting from himself and those with him is a very formal one. It’s almost like getting a letter from a council or board who have been examining charges against you. By separating himself from the Apostles in Jerusalem, Paul is saying that there would be no need to consult them as to his authority as an Apostle. His appointment by God did not require their approval. But he also implicates those Judaizers who came from Jerusalem as being false prophets because they, no doubt, claimed they were sent by the Apostle James and not directly from God.⁸

We should also notice that the letter is addressed to the ekklēsia in the province of Galatia. This Greek noun (“Churches” in KJV) does not mean buildings or converted synagogues, but rather an assembly of believers which may have been in homes, upper rooms, synagogues, etc.⁹ So not only is this letter addressed to several such assemblies, but it thereby indicates that most of them, if not all, were being misled by these false Jewish teachers. Some of these cities were Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. Furthermore, Paul’s greeting to them makes the point that he and the persons with him are fellow believers in Jesus the Anointed One. This is important because of the many times he makes reference to those intruders who came to mislead them should not be thought of as fellow believers¹⁰.¹¹

Furthermore, Marvin Vincent in his word studies says that the churches of Galatia which Paul addresses here in verse two are most probably meant the churches in the southern Roman province of Galatia; those namely in Iconium, Pisidian Antioch, Lystra, and Derbe; and not the Christians living in the Galatian district lying to the north and east of Lycaonia and Phrygia, which formed only a part of the Roman province, and the chief cities of which were Ancyra, Tavium, and Pessinus. Historians tell us that Cæsar Augustus, (25 BC) formed this Roman province, and included the provinces of Lycaonia, Isauria, southeastern Phrygia, and a portion of Pisidia. All part of modern Turkey today. The churches in this province were founded by Paul in his first missionary tour, sent out by the assembly in Antioch¹².¹³

As to Paul’s claim of having been appointed by God as an Apostle, some say that he may not have necessarily been referring to what happened to him on the road to Damascus, but what took place in the church at Antioch.¹⁴ However, in the very next breath he points out that this appointment was not done by any one person or group of persons but by God the Father and Jesus the Anointed One. So what happened in Antioch caused him to be a missionary and what happened in Damascus made him an Apostle.

While Paul does not name those who are with him at the time of this writing, it is safe to say that he spoke of those who accompanied him on his journeys such as Barnabas, Silas, Luke, Mark, etc. If Paul was on his way back to Jerusalem for his first visit with the council, then he may have stopped in Antioch for a rest. And upon hearing about the trouble brewing in the churches in Galatia, for which he expressed surprise that it happened so soon after his visit there, he may be including those in the church in Antioch as part of those who were with him. Could it be that those who followed Paul into Galatia with their insistence on adoption of Jewish customs and manners were the same converted Pharisees that sneaked into Paul’s visit with the Council in Jerusalem?¹⁵

Another thing Paul reveals is that he is not writing to just one assembly, but many located in the Province of Galatia. What makes this so interesting is that some of what he has to say may apply to one assembly more than to another. It is also informative that we know these Galatians were referred to in history as far back at 124 BC.¹⁶ Jewish insurgent Judas Maccabee heard of how mighty, valiant, and noble the Romans were, and one of the things that convinced him was what he learned about their wars and noble acts done among the Galatians, and how they conquered them and brought them under their control, even forcing them to pay taxes. And later on, stories were told of a battle that 8,000 Jewish militants fought in Babylon with the Galatians and 4,000 Macedonians. When the battle concluded, the Jewish militants destroyed 120,000 of the enemy with the help they received from heaven and plundered much treasure.¹⁷

Needless to say, the Galatians did not seem to put up much of a fight when confronted. So no wonder these few Judaizers from Jerusalem were able to take control over the assemblies in such little time. But Jewish historian Flavius Josephus adds another bit of information that may help us focus more sharply on where the Galatians got their character and world view. Josephus says that Gomer, the first son of Japheth, Noah’s son, whose descendants inhabited what would become Europe, settled in the land the Greeks called Galatia [Galls], but who were also called Gomerites.

From Roman history, we see that the Galls (Gauls) were a constant source of aggravation for the Emperors of Rome. So the characteristics of Gomer were already well embedded in the Galatians. Many of these Galls moved further east and settled in what we know today as France.¹⁸ Josephus also tells us that when King Herod went down to Egypt to meet Caesar, and as a present gave him four hundred Galatians who were Cleopatra’s guards.¹⁹ Also, when Herod died, during the funeral procession, representatives from various countries marched ahead of the ornate golden bier. First were Herod’s guards, then came the Thracians (Greeks), followed by the Germans, and then the Galatians. Seems like they never were in first place.²⁰

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCH

INTRODUCTION

There has been a certain amount of controversy over how the Epistle to the Galatians became the book that launched Martin Luther into a reformation in order to bring out the truth that those we become right with God, do so by faith, not by works. The fact that it took so long for this to happen is at the center of this debate. The Roman church in Europe during the Middle Ages offers one explanation:

The Bible was on scrolls and parchments during the early centuries of Christianity. No one possessed an individual “Bible”. In the Middle Ages, each Bible was copied by hand. Most people were, at best, only functionally literate. That is partially why they used stained glass windows and art to tell the Bible story. The printing press was not invented until 1436 by Johann Gutenberg.

So prior to 1436, the idea of everybody having a Bible was out of the question, even if they could read. It’s hard to imagine a world without photocopiers, printing presses, email, and websites. After the invention of the printing press, prior to Luther’s Bible being published in German, there were over 20 versions of the whole Bible translated into the various German dialects (High and Low) by Catholics. Similarly, there were several vernacular versions of the Bible published in other languages both before and after the Reformation. The Church did condemn certain vernacular translations because of what it felt were bad translations and anti-Catholic notes.

This is certainly understandable and logical. But there is another side to this story. It is on record that at the Council of Toulouse (1229 AD), a decree was issued that said: “We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament, but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.”

This was followed by the Council of Tarragona (1234 AD) in with the following Ruling was made: “No one may possess the books of the Old and New Testaments in the Romance language, and if anyone possesses them he must turn them over to the local bishop within eight days after promulgation of this decree, so that they may be burned…”

Then at the Ecumenical Council of Constance (1415 AD), a Proclamation was published: “Oxford professor, and theologian John Wycliffe, was the first (1380 AD) to translate the New Testament into English to “…help Christian men to study the Gospel in that tongue in which they know best Christ’s wording.” For this “heresy” Wycliffe was posthumously condemned by Arundel, the archbishop of Canterbury. By the Council’s decree “Wycliffe’s bones were exhumed and publicly burned and the ashes were thrown into the Swift River.”

And this led to a similar fate for William Tyndale (1536 AD), who was burned at the stake for translating the Bible into English. According to Tyndale, the Church forbid owning or reading the Bible to control and restrict the teachings and to enhance their own power and importance.

All of this is provided here, not to point fingers at anyone nor make unnecessary accusations, but to give a backdrop the Martin Luther’s emergence from such a state of secrecy that held the truth to what true salvation was by faith. To that end, I encourage you to read the preface to his commentary on Galatians published in 1539 AD.

Martin Luther’s Preface to Galatians (Excerpt) First of all, we speak of the argument of this epistle: in it, Paul is seeking to establish the doctrine of faith, grace, the forgiveness of sins, or Christian righteousness in order that we may know the difference between Christian righteousness and all other kinds of righteousness. There are many other kinds of righteousness. There is civil or political righteousness, which kings, princes of the world, magistrates and lawyers deal with. There is also ceremonial righteousness, which the traditions of men teach. Besides these, there is another righteousness, called the righteousness of the law, or the Ten Commandments. Above all these, there is yet another righteousness: the righteousness of faith or Christian righteousness, which we must diligently discern from the others. The others are quite contrary to this righteousness, both because they flow out of the laws of kings and rulers, religious traditions, and the commandments of God; and because they consist in our works, and may be worked by us either in our natural strength, or else by the gift of God. These kind of righteousness are also the gift of God, like all other good things which we enjoy. But the most excellent righteousness of faith, which God through the Anointed One, without any works, imputes to us, is neither political, nor ceremonial, nor the righteousness of God’s Law, nor consists of works, but is contrary to these; that is to say, it is a mere passive righteousness, as the others are active. For in the righteousness of faith, we work nothing, we render nothing to God, but we only receive and allow another to work in us, that is to say, God. This is righteousness hidden in a mystery, which the world does not know. Indeed, Christians themselves do not thoroughly understand it, and can hardly take hold of it in their temptations. Therefore, it must be diligently taught and continually practiced. The troubled conscience, in view of God’s judgment, has no remedy against desperation and eternal death, unless it takes hold of the forgiveness of sins by free grace, freely offered in the Anointed One Jesus, which if it can apprehend, it may then be at rest. Then I can boldly say: I seek not active or working righteousness, for if I had it, I could not trust it, neither dare I make it a barrier against the judgment of God. Then I abandon myself from all active righteousness, both of my own and of God’s law, and embrace only that passive righteousness, which is the righteousness of grace, mercy, and forgiveness of sins. I rest only upon that righteousness, which is the righteousness of the Anointed One and the Holy Spirit. The highest wisdom of Christians is not to know the law and be ignorant of works, especially when the conscience is wrestling with God. But among those who are not God’s people, the greatest wisdom is to know the law and is assuredly persuaded in his heart there is now no law, nor wrath of God, but only grace and mercy for the Anointed One’s sake, he cannot be saved; for by the law comes the knowledge of sin. Conversely, works and the keeping of the law is strictly required in the world, as if there were no promise or grace. A wise and faithful practitioner of the Word of God must so moderate the law that it may be kept within its bounds. He that teaches that men are justified before God by the observation of the law, passes the bounds of the law and confounds these two kinds of righteousness, active and passive. Conversely, he presents the law and works to the old self, and the promise and forgiveness of sins and God’s mercy to the new self divides the Word well. For the flesh or the old self must be coupled with the law and works; the spirit or the new self must be joined with the promise of God and His mercy. When I see a person oppressed with the law, terrified with sin, and thirsting for comfort, it is time that I remove out of their sight the law and active righteousness, and set before them the gospel, the Christian or passive righteousness, which offers the promise made in the Anointed One, who came for afflicted and sinners. We teach the difference between these two kinds of righteousness, active and passive, to the end that manners and faith, works and grace, political and religious, should not be confounded, or taken the one for the other. Both are necessary, but each must be kept within its bounds: Christian righteousness pertains to the new self, and the righteousness of the law pertains to the old self, which is born of flesh and blood. Upon this old self, as upon a donkey, there must be laid a burden that may press self down, and they must not enjoy the freedom of the spirit of grace, except they first put upon self the new self, by faith in the Anointed One. Then may they enjoy the kingdom and inestimable gift of grace. This I say so that no man should think we reject or forbid good works. We imagine two worlds, the one heavenly, the other earthly. In these, we place these two kinds of righteousness, the one far different from the other. The righteousness of the law is earthly and deals with earthly things. But Christian righteousness is heavenly, which we have not of ourselves, but receive from heaven; we work not for it, but by grace, it is worked in us and is realized by faith. Do we then do nothing? Do we do nothing at all for the obtaining of this righteousness? I answer, Nothing at all! For this is perfect righteousness, to do nothing, to hear nothing, to know nothing of the law, or of works, but to know and believe this only, that the Anointed One is gone to the Father, and is not now seen; that He sits in heaven at the right hand of His Father, not as a judge, but made unto us of God, wisdom, righteousness, holiness, and redemption — briefly, that He is our high priest entreating for us, and reigning over us, and in us, by grace. In this heavenly righteousness, sin can have no place, for there is no law; and where there is no law, there can be no transgression.1 Seeing then that here sin has no place, there can be no anguish of conscience, no fear, no heaviness. Therefore, John says: “He that is born of God cannot sin.”2 But if there is any fear or grief of conscience, it is a token that this righteousness is withdrawn, that grace is hidden, and that the Anointed One is hidden out of sight. But where the Anointed One is truly seen, there must be full and perfect joy in the Lord, with peace of conscience, which thinks this way: Although I am a sinner by the law and under condemnation of the law, yet I do not despair, yet I do not die, because the Anointed One lives, who is both my righteousness and my everlasting life. In that righteousness and life, I have no sin, no fear, no sting of conscience, no care of death. I am indeed a sinner as applied to this present life, and its righteousness, as a child of Adam. But I have another righteousness and life eternal; by whom this my body, being dead and brought to dust, shall be raised up again, and delivered from the bondage of the law and sin, and shall be sanctified together with my spirit. So both these continue while we live here. The flesh is accused, exercised with temptations, oppressed with heaviness and sorrow, bruised by the active righteousness of the law; but the spirit reigns, rejoices, and is saved by this passive and Christian righteousness, because it knows that it has a Lord in Heaven, at the right hand of His Father, who abolished the law, sin, death, and has trodden under His feet all evils, led them captive, and triumphed over them in Himself3.4 Martin Luther