An Introduction to Galatians | Galatians 1:1-5 | Richard Caldwell

Scripture

• Galatians 1:1–5

About this sermon

Introduction: Today we come to the study of a New Testament letter that is one of the most influential in the history of the church. All Scripture is God breathed. All Scripture is massively important and useful in the lives of God’s people. But at the time of the protestant reformation, God made unique use of the book of Galatians. Robert Gromacki — “Galatians has been called both the Magna Charta of Christian Liberty and the Christian Declaration of Independence. Out of its pages grew the Protestant Reformation, for it was by study in Galatians that Luther’s heart was opened to the truth of justification by faith alone.” One of the things that you always strive to understand as you begin a new book study, is the time of the writing of the book and the circumstances surrounding its message. Who wrote it? To whom did he write? When did he write it? Why did he write it? Well, the author is easy. He tells us in verse 1. It’s Paul the apostle. But the time of its writing and the set of circumstances surrounding its writing are not so clear. If you do a lot reading in the commentaries on these questions, you will find that historically there are two main camps when it comes to answering these questions. Some believe that the letter was written to the Galatians considered ethnically. The Gauls — the Celts. The people who settled in the central and northern parts of the Roman province of Galatia. And the people who embrace this view offer many sound arguments in favor of their position. Then there are those (and this is now the predominant view) who believe that Paul wrote this letter to the churches that were born during the missionary trips written about in the book of Acts. These were Galatians in the geographical sense, in the provincial sense, and they lived in the southern part of the Roman province of Galatia (which encompassed both areas). Ethnically, there were mixed people groups, and that included Jews and Gentiles in the churches of this region. The letter, then, would be addressed to the churches in the cities mentioned in Acts 13, Antioch of Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe. And after wading through all the arguments, I think that’s correct. I think this is a follow up to the people that Paul had personally led to Christ, given initial instruction, fought off doctrinal wolves in the form of the Judaizing influence, but now he was troubled to hear that the churches were still being influenced. When the southern Galatia view is accepted, then there is another question that must be answered, and that will have some effect on how we understand chapter 2 of this book. Was this written before or after the Jerusalem council? You will remember that the Jerusalem council took up matters precisely like those being discussed in the book of Galatians. Matters that have to do with the role of the law of Moses in the salvation of sinners, in the life of the believer after salvation, and matters that had to do with matters of conscience and would help maintain the relationship of unity between Jewish Christians and gentile believers. Is chapter 2 describing something that took place in a private meeting at the time of the Jerusalem council — 14 years after his first visit 3 years post-conversion, or is it describing a meeting that Paul had with leaders 14 years after his conversion? If it’s the latter, then Paul is describing his 2nd visit to Jerusalem (see 1:18). The visit he describes in chapter 2 would have taken place when he was delivering a financial gift on behalf of the poor saints in Jerusalem, and it corresponds to the information given in Acts 11:27-30. That would mean that the book is written shortly before the Jerusalem council, about 47 AD. If chapter 2 is Paul describing something that took place privately at the time of the Jerusalem council (Acts 15), then most would say it was written after Paul’s 2nd missionary journey, from Antioch (in Syria) around 49 AD. The 14 years would be accounting for the time after his first Jerusalem visit, 3 years after his conversion. It would have been his 3rd visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. I find myself persuaded by the evidence that would point to this being AFTER the Jerusalem council, and the letter focused on the churches birthed during the Paul’s first missionary journey. BUT THE WHOLE DISCUSSION IS A GREAT REMINDER ABOUT THE NATURE OF SCRIPTURE VERSUS THE NATURE OF HISTORY OUTSIDE OF SCRIPTURE. WHAT GOD GAVE US AND PRESERVED FOR US IS THE LETTER, NOT AN INERRANT KNOWLEDGE OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING THE LETTER.