Friday, 9 August 2019

SAINT PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS




SAINT PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS









BY

UROUNA JAMES

GBORU ANDREW

OLAOYE JOACHIM

AIBELUNUN PAUL

MUOGBO MICHAEL

DOGO MATTHIAS

ALUFOHAI GODWIN







BEING A TERM PAPER SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THEOLOGY SAINTS PETER AND PAUL MAJOR SEMINARY BODIJA, IBADAN IN AFFILIATION TO THE PONTIFICAL URBAN UNIVERSITY ROME, ITALY IN PARTIAL FUFILMENT FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF ART DEGREE IN THEOLOGY



COURSE: INTRODUCTION TO NEW TESTAMENT

LECTURER: REV. FR. FRANCIS OBAFEMI ADESINA

DATE: DECEMBER, 2018

















UROUNA JAMES

THE BACKGROUND

Paul’s recollection of his good and miracle-filled experience with the Galatians fuels his anger towards them for he found it hard to understand why they would after such encounter with them, now consider him as one who preached to them a defective gospel of Christ. This was due to the fact that some Jewish Christians came to Galatia after Paul’s departure, preaching a counterfeit gospel to Paul’s, which is that of salvation through circumcision to participate in the Abrahamic covenant.

Paul on the other hand is seen to have preached a persuasive gospel devoid of the circumcision factor as a requirement for salvation, but a gospel of justification by faith in Christ both for Jews and Gentiles.

GENERAL ANALYSIS OF THE MESSAGE

Opening: Paul calls himself an apostle, a name he claims to have originated from Jesus himself, and here, he is seen to have mentioned a co-sender, that is the message was solely from him (Paul) to the Churches of Galatia, and is marked by an angry response to the attacks on him.

The Body: the body opens with an introduction which presents immediately the issue at hand but with firm seriousness. Paul then renders a defence of the gospel he preaches as being divinely revealed and not from human beings. He did this by narrating the key events of his conversion and preaching apostolate and of his acceptance as an apostle for the uncircumcised.

Paul then advances six arguments from the scripture and experience supporting his claims that the Galatians let themselves be deceived. He started from Christ’s crucifixion and the reception of the spirit without the law, emphasising the law as only a custodian before the advent of Christ, to the desire of the Galatians to become slaves by law again even though they have already been saved by the son’s redemptive act, the inconceivable idea of him who was regarded as an angel by them to suddenly become their enemy, and the wrong lessons drawn by the preachers from Abraham, Hagar and Sarah.

He concludes the body by affirming the place of faith and not the law in combating the works of the flesh that are opposed to the spirit. He concludes by stating in categorical words against circumcision that in the Israel of God he preaches it doesn’t matter if one is circumcised or not.





Aftermath Of  Galatians In Paul’s Career

OLAOYE  JOACHIM AND ALUFOHAI GODWIN

The errors of Judaizer who had come to disturb the faith of the Galatians provoked Paul’s letter to the Galatians. Paul was angry that the Galatians could easily accept a wrong doctrine and not only that; Paul was regarded by the Galatians as fake preacher who is not authentic. Here we could see his sentiment. The use of intemperate language by Paul in addressing the Galatians could be seen as an expression of disappointment in them. In Gal.3: 1 we came across the expression ‘you foolish Galatians’ and also came across another one in Gal. 1:9 ‘anyone who preaches to you a gospel other than the one you were first given is to be  under curse’ 

The intemperate language used by Paul could further not help the issue on ground but could further cause more division among the Galatians. If we put ourselves in the shoe of the Galatians we could imagine what could be their feeling that a prophet of God who has once preached to them about being a good Christian; now casting spell and curse on them. That could be scandalous to them and that could made them to doubt more about the authenticity of Paul’s teaching. 

More so, we can also see another appalling word in this letter  ‘I could wish that those who are unsettling you would go further and mutilate themselves’ the judaizer would never forgive Paul for uttering this. Paul painted them as deceitful preacher and also attacked their personality. And it is assume that Paul derogative remark about the Jews and Peter would have gotten to Jerusalem. And that might have led to his thought of going back to Jerusalem.

Could Paul be excused by the Galatians for his unguided expression on the ground that he is angry. Or could the Galatians understand with Paul that, it is a weakness for him. Even from this various possibilities it could establish that aftermath of Galatians would necessarily have negative impact on the Galatians. 

TO WHERE AND WHEN?  MUOGBO MICHAEL AND AIBELUNUN PAUL

These questions probe directly into the controversy of whom exactly Paul was writing to and when exactly he wrote the letter. The term Galatia brought some form of ambiguity with it, especially with regards to the understanding of the areas referred to because of the political and geographical history attached to Galatia which was at one time restricted to a mountainous central section around Ancyra and at another time incorporated into the Rome as the province of Galatia including Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe. The contention is between two positions categorized under two theories: The South Galatian theory which holds that the letter is addressed to the Christians in those cities in the southern part of the province of Galatia and The North Galatian theory which holds that the letter is addressed to the ethnic Galatians in the north central region. The latter is the majority theory. However, in this letter addressed by Paul, he mentions that his first preaching of the gospel in that area is coincidental due to his poor health that interrupted his journey unexpectedly, but he also acknowledged and commended the hospitality of the people (4:13-15).

The South Galatian theory which was proposed in the last two centuries and defended by scholars like W.M. Ramsay and F.F Bruce holds that there are evidences in Acts that Paul evangelized the southern part of the province of Galatia during his first missionary journey and briefly during his second journey. However Acts didn’t refer to the southern region as Galatia, instead it placed them within their specific districts like Antioch in Pisidia and Derbe in Lycaonia. According to Acts, the Jews and gentiles where reached by Paul’s mission but the indication in Galatians doesn’t include the Jews. Arguments for the Southern theory include Paul’s habit of employing the names of Roman provinces. This theory suggests that the letter could have been written in 50 A.D after Paul’s missionary journey

The North Galatian Theory which seems more persuasive holds that the term Galatians is appropriated to the people who were ethnically of that descent than for the Hellenized city populace. This theory draws inferences and based its argument on the movement of Paul and the hindrances he had at some regions during his missionary journey. This theory suggests that the letter was written about 54 or 55 A.D. 

The “Faith [pistis] of Christ” (2:16, etc.)  DOGO MATTHIAS

As aforementioned, both (Paul and the Preachers) proclaimed what God accomplished through Christ in terms of Justification for both the Jews and gentiles. However, the difference(s) in their message lies on how the gentile were to receive this gift of God in Christ Jesus. Hence, Paul’s major discuss centered on being justified or justification not from the works of the law but from and through faith of Christ Jesus.[1]  Now, the construction “from/through faith of Christ” (ek/dia pisteos christou) can both understood in the objective and subjective genitive. In the objective sense, it implies Christian faith in Christ Jesus. While in the subjective sense, this refers to faith possessed or manifested in Christ.

In interpretation, the faith of Christ is sometimes understood to mean his fidelity to God’s plan, which brought about justification.[2] Though, the more common interpretation is faith in Christ (through the crucifixion and resurrection) found in Gal 3:26, which is seen as a response that brings about justification, although God also generates the response, a divine grace given to believe. Nonetheless, scholars such as Martyn believes that Gal 2:20-21 shows that Christ’s faith is Christ’s faithful death. However, others would suggest that Christ’s faith manifested in his death is given to his followers through faith in Christ.[3]

GBORU ANDREW

ISSUES AND PROBLEMS FOR REFLECTION

1.      VARIOUS PROPOSALS: Many scholars have written on those who opposed Paul in Galatia. Since the 20th century, many scholars have argued that simultaneously, Paul was opposed by two groups; Judaizing Christians from Jerusalem (who insist on the circumcision of gentiles) and the Libertine Proponents of the Spirit (who believe they could gratify the desires of the flesh). Studies suggest that Gal. 5: 16-26 must have been directed to the libertines. Some other proposals suggest that the preachers weren’t outsiders but of the community.

However, these proposals seem to create unnecessary complications at the neglect of the fact that some Jewish Christian preachers came demanding circumcision of the gentiles in the Galatian Church.

2.      INTERPRETATION OF THE ABRAHAM/SARAH/ HAGAR STORY: Paul and the preachers were judged to be at contrast on the implicative interpretations of the Abraham/Sarah/Hagar story in Genesis 12, 15 and 17 which emphasise God’s promise of blessing the gentiles through the faith of Abraham. Paul and the preachers’ way of interpreting seem quite different from that of modern exegesis, as it was very free and more than literal compared to modern standard. Despite this difference, there remains the question of whose interpretive version can be judged to be more convincing to the gentiles.

3.      MODERN EXEGESIS: Compared to modern standard, problem arises with Paul’s interpretive use of the Old Testament text of Heb. 2: 3-4 which makes reference to faith. There is however some interpretive differences in the Hebrew Old Testament, Greek Old Testament, the DSS, the letter to the Hebrews and in Paul’s citations in Galatians (3:11) and Romans (1:17) where he interprets the Hebrew passage to mean that the just live by faith in or in fidelity to Jesus Christ.

4.      REVELATION THROUGH CHRIST: Previous paragraphs show that some arguments of Paul for faith and law might not be very convincing in themselves. We should not think he derived his position from these unconvincing arguments rather,  the position shows a conviction in a gospel that is not of human authority but through a revelation of Jesus Christ Himself. Thus, in this revelation, Paul gains a new perspective to the Gospel where God transforms the world through Christ’s crucifixion.  Outside his polemics, the positive message in Galatians is central to understanding Paul  because even though his words were shaped to adequately counter the preachers, yet most of what he said about Christ, faith and freedom could have been said even if the problem with the preachers never existed.

5.      PAUL’S CONTRAST AGAINST LAW AND FREEDOM: In Galatians, Paul contrasts both the law and freedom. It could be that the preachers were concerned about the distinct ethical directives in the law which seemed to have been left loose in Paul’s teaching. Freedom is good but must be defined. Paul counters them by condemning a misunderstanding of freedom and so he warns those who walk by the Spirit to stay far from “works of the flesh” which he lists in Gal.: 5:17-21. In a way, his words have come to become a guiding principle or law for Christians.

6.      PAUL’S APOCALYPTIC MIND-SET: Paul’s apocalyptic mindset lead to his denial of social or political equality when he famously denied the difference between Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female. Although he mentions inequality among Christians in some of his other writings, however, he simply emphasises equality through Christ in God’s salvation plan when he mentions “you are all one is Christ Jesus”.

7.      MARCION’S MISUNDERSTANDING OF PAUL: Marcion’s New Testament is considered to be majorly Pauline (Luke and ten epistles). Marcion rejects the Old Testament and all of heritage from Judaism, but this is seen as an extreme adaptation from Paulinism. Marcion was a student of Paul and according to F. Overbect, Marcion was the only student who understood Paul, he was also the student who misunderstood him. Perhaps this is why the 2nd century Jewish Christians came to hate Paul as he was considered to have influenced the Jewish heritage delay the spread of the gospel. Finding in Galatians, comments against the law and how it seemed to have fuelled Marcion’s absolutism and later Jewish antagonism gives us a picture of how scripture can be misinterpreted outside the author’s intention.







[1]Raymond Brown, p. 477.
[2]Ibid, p.478.
[3]Ibid.

No comments:

Post a Comment