GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE

(1 Co 16', Gal V, and 1 P 1'). A possible fourth case (2 Ti 4i») must be left out of account, as the reading there is doubtful. There is an alternative 'Gallia,' which, even if it be not the original, suggests that the word 'Galatia' there should be taken in the sense of 'Gallia' (that is, France). It is beyond doubt that in the passage of 1 Peter the word must be taken in the sense of the province. The bearer of the letter evidently landed at some port on the Black Sea, perhaps Sinope, and visited the provinces in the order in which they appear in the address of the letter: — Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynla, taking ship again at the Black Sea for Rome. The Taurus range of mountains was always conceived of as dividing the peninsula of Asia Minor into two parts, and St. Peter here appears as supervising or advising the whole body of Christians north of the Taurus range. (The effect of taking 'Galatia' in the other sense would be to leave out certain Pauline churches, Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Fisidian Antioch, and perhaps these alone, in all that vast region: which is absurd.) With regard to the two passages in St. Paul, the case is settled by his unvarying usage. It has been noted that he, as a Roman citizen and a statesman, invariably uses geographical terms in the Roman sense, and that he even does violence to the Greek language by forcing the Latin names for ' Philippians ' (Ph 4") and 'Illyricum' (Ro 15") into Greek, and passes by the proper Greek term in each case. We are bound , therefore, to believe that he uses 'Galatia' in the Roman sense, namely in the meaning of the Roman province as above defined. (This province had, as we have seen, ' Galatia' in the narrower and earlier sense as one of its parts.) It follows, therefore, that he uses 'Galatians' (Gal 3') also in the wider sense of all (Christian) inhabitants of the province, irrespective of their race, as far as they were known to him.

In order to discover what communities in this vast province are especially addressed by the Apostle in his Epistle, it is necessary to make a critical examination of the only two passages in Acts which afford us a clue (16« 182»). It is important to note that St. Luke never uses the term 'Galatia' or the term 'Galatians,' but only the adjective 'Galatic' (16= IS^s). In 16« the rules of the Greek language require us to translate: — 'the Phrygo-Galatic region' or 'the region wliich is both Phrygian and Galatian'; that is, 'the region which according to one nomenclature is Phrygian, and according to another is Galatian.' This can be none other than that section of the province Galatia which was known as Phrygla Galatica, and which contained Pisidian Antioch and Iconium, exactly the places we should expect St. Paul and his companions to go to after Derbe and Lystra. In 18'=' the Greek may be translated either 'the Galatico-Phrygian region' or 'the Galatian region and Phrygia,' preferably the latter, as it is difficult otherwise to account for the order in the Greek. 'The Galatian region,' then, will cover Derbe and Lystra; 'Phrygia' will include Iconium and Pisidian Antioch. We conclude then that, whether any other churches are comprised in the address of the Epistle to the Galatians or not, — and a negative answer is probably correct, — the churches of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch are included. There is not a scrap of evidence that St. Paul had visited any other cities in that great province. A. Souter.

GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE.— 1. Occasion of

the Epistle. — From internal evidence we gather that St. Paul had, when he wrote, paid two visits to the Galatians. On the first visit, wliich was due to an illness (4'*), he was welcomed in the most friendly way; on the second he warned them against Judaizers (1' 6' 'again,' cf. 4" 'the former time,' though this may be translated ' formerly ') . After the second visit Judaizers came among the Galatians, and, under the influence of a single individual (the ' who ' of 3' S' is singular, cf . 5'°)

GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE

persuaded them that they must be circumcised, that St. Paul had changed his mind and was inconsistent, that he had refrained from preaching circumcision to them only from a desire to be ' all things to all men,' but that he had preached it (at any rate as the better way) to others. It is doubtful if the Judaizers upheld circum-cision as necessary to salvation, or only as necessary to a complete Christianity. It depends on whether we fix the date before or after the Council of Ac 15, which of these views we adopt (see § 4) . Further, the Judaizers disparaged St. Paul's authority as compared with that of the Twelve. On hearing this the Apostle hastily wrote the Epistle to check the evil, and (probably) soon followed up the Epistle with a personal visit.

2. To whom written. The Korth Galatian and South Galatian theories.— it is disputed whether the inhabi-tants of N. Galatia are addressed (Lightfoot, Salmon, the older commentators, Schmiedel in Encyc. Bibl.), or the inhabitants of Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe, which lay in the S. part of the Roman prov-ince Galatia (Ramsay, Sanday, Zahn, Renan, Pfleiderer, etc.). Those who hold the N. Galatian theory take Ac 16« 18" as indicating that St. Paul visited Galatia proper, making a long detour. They press the argument that he would not have called men of the four cities by the name 'Galatians,' as these lay outside Galatia proper, and that ' Galatians ' must mean men who are Gauls by blood and descent; also that 'by writers speaking familiarly of the scenes in which they had themselves taken part' popular usage rather than official is probable, and therefore to call the Christian communities in the four cities 'the churches of Galatia' would be as unnatural as to speak of Pesth or (before the Italo- Austrian war) Venice as 'the Aus-trian cities' (Lightfoot, Gal. p. 19). Pesth is not a case in point, for no educated person would call it ' Austrian'; but the Venice illustration is apt. These are the only weighty arguments. On the other hand, the N. Galatian theory creates Churches unheard of elsewhere in 1st cent, records; it is difficult on this hypothesis to understand the silence of Acts, which narrates all the critical points of St. Paul's work. But Acts does tell us very fully of the foundation of the Church in S. Galatia. Then, again, on the N. Galatian theory, St. Paul nowhere in his Epistles mentions the four cities where such eventful things happened, except once for blame in 2 Ti 3" — a silence made more remarkable by the fact that in the collection of the alms he does mention 'the churches of Galatia' (1 Co 16'). If the four cities are not here referred to, why were they omitted? The main argument of the N. Galatian theory, given above, is sufficiently answered by taking into account St. Paul's relation to the Roman Empire (see art. Acts of the Apostles, § 7.)

With regard to the nomenclature, we notice that St. Luke sometimes uses popular non-political names like 'Phrygia' or 'Myaia' (Ac 2'" 16=); but St. Paul, as a Roman citizen, uses place-names in their Roman sense throughout, e.g. ' Achaia' (which in Greek popular usage had a much narrower meaning than the Roman province, and did not include Athens, while St. Paul contrasts it with Macedonia, the only other Roman province in Greece, and therefore clearly uses it in its Roman sense, Ro 15» 2 Co 9^ ll", 1 Th 1"-; cf.

1 Co 16*), 'Macedonia,' 'Illyrioum' (Ro 15" only; the Greeks did not use this name popularly as a substantive, and none but a Roman could so denote the province; in

2 Ti 4" St. Paul himself calls it ' Dalmatia,' as the name- usage was changing from the one to the other), ' Syria and Cilicia' (one Roman province), and 'Asia' (the Roman

arovince of that name, the W. part of Asia Minor, including [ysia). We may compare St. Peter's nomenclature in 1 P l^j where he is so much influenced by Pauline ideas as to designate all AsiaMinornorthof the Taurus by enumerat-ing the Roman provinces. St. Paul, then, calls all citizens of the province of Galatia by the honourable name ' Galatians.' ■To call the inhabitants of the four cities 'Phrygians' or ' Lycaonians ' would be as discourteous as to call them ' slaves ' or ' barbarians.' The Roman colonies like Pisidian Antioch were most jealous of their Roman connexion.

The South Galatian theory reconciles the Epistle and Acts without the somewhat violent hypotheses of the rival

277