GALATIANS
NT scholars consider Paul’s letter to the Galatians is, doctrinally speaking, second in importance only to Romans.
In terms of background, Galatians is probably the 2nd earliest letter we have of Paul. The date of the letter depends on the answer to the question: Who were the Galatians? Yes, they were Gentiles, but in what way were they “Galatian”? There are 2 theories. The 1st, the North Galatians Theory, holds that they were ethnically Galatian. This would mean that Paul evangelized the Galatians on his 2nd missionary journey. In that case he would have written the letter from Ephesus in the mid-50s, and it would date after the big church council meeting described in Acts 15. The other theory, the South Galatians Theory, maintains that they were geographically Galatian. This would mean that Paul evangelized the Galatians on his 1st journey; hence, he would have written this letter from Macedonia in the early 50s, and it would date before Acts 15. In terms of why Paul wrote Galatians, the reason seems clear enough. False teachers came to the church preaching and teaching that the Galatians had to follow the Mosaic Law (like, for example, circumcision) in order to truly be Christian (cf. 1:6-9; 6:12-13). These teachers had successfully attacked Paul’s authority as an apostle (cf. chap. 1) over the church. So, Paul writes to defend the true gospel as well as the legitimacy of his apostleship.
The basic outline of the letter is as follows: the Introduction (1:1-10), Paul’s defence of his apostleship and his gospel (1:11-2:21), Paul’s proof for the gospel of justification by faith (3:1-4:31), the ethical implications of justification by faith (5:1-6:17), and his closing (6:18). So let’s follow the flow of Paul’s thought in this letter.
It’s clear from his Introduction (as well as elsewhere) that Paul is angry with this church. If you compare his intro (vv. 6-10, say) with his other letters, the Greek sentences here are quite short and simple, with no grammatical adornments. This suggests he’s mad; also, some of the language he uses is very strong (e.g., 1:8-9; 3:1, 3; 5:12). Paul begins by drawing a line in the sand between his gospel and all other gospels. He insists that everyone who preaches a different gospel from his is divinely cursed (Gal 1:6-9), and they are nothing more than people-pleasers (1:10). Question: Is it really possible to draw so strong a line in the sand as Paul does here? Why or why not?
Obviously, since Paul’s opponents have undercut his authority, Paul must re-establish it; so Paul defends his apostleship (1:11-2:21). The 1st thing he does is emphasize that he received his gospel directly from Jesus and not through any human intermediary. In fact this is how he starts his letter: Gal 1:1. While Paul introduces himself as an apostle in his other letters, this is the only time that he explicitly delineates the divine origin of his apostleship. Why? Because it had come under serious attack in Galatia. Paul also states that God was the one who called him to preach his gospel to the Gentiles (2:7)—he didn’t do it b/c “it seemed like a good idea at the time.” Paul’s point about the divine origin of his gospel is huge. Remember, he did not walk with Jesus for 3 years the way the other apostles did. In fact Paul became a Christian probably some 5 years after Jesus’ resurrection and ascension. Even Paul recognized the irregularity of his apostleship (cf. 1 Cor 15:7-9). Hence, his apostleship would have been an easy target for opponents. But Paul stresses that he absolutely did not receive his gospel from 1 of the other apostles. In other words, he was not “taught” by them—otherwise he would be under them in terms of authority and knowledge. Rather, he had been preaching for years before he got around to meeting the other apostles (Gal 1:16-19). And when he finally met them, he notes 2 things: they added nothing to his message (2:6)—i.e., his gospel message was spot-on; and they recognized that God was at work in Paul’s ministry every bit as much as he had been at work their own (Gal 2:7-8). Question: Given Paul’s divine calling, why would it have still been so important for him to meet the other apostles? And, as a bit of a side note, Paul shows the veracity and authority of his apostleship when, after Peter acted hypocritically before the Galatians, Paul publicly challenged and rebuked him in front of other church leaders. Only a true apostle could ever hope do something like that to 1 of the “pillars” of the early church!
Now that Paul has re-established the authority of his apostleship in this letter, he is in a better position to defend his gospel: justification by faith.