View attachment 66
[Click image to enlarge]
Why does the destination of the Epistle to the Galatians matter?
1. If it is possible, an accurate identification of the historical context that triggered the Epistle in the first place is always important to know.
2. The date of the Epistle depend upon the destination view one holds. If the Southern Galatia view, then the Epistle was written probably after Paul's second visit to these churches (see Galatians 4:13 and Acts 16:1-4). Judging by Paul's shock that the Galatians were quickly departing from the gospel (see Galatians 1:6), this view means that the letter was likely written very shortly after Paul's visit. Paul may have written the letter while in Corinth, where he was staying during his second missionary journey. If the theory is true, Galatians would be the first or very close to the first of the letters of Paul.
I lean towards the Southern Galatian view for the following reasons:
1. No real references is made of founding churches in the North. In Acts 16:6 and Acts 18:23, we find that Paul may have visited or passed through some northern portions of Galatia while journeying from Antioch to Ephesus, but no reference in these passages in Acts mention the founding of churches in the region. It would be odd for Paul to leave out the Southern churches that were well-known in any correspondence from Paul.
2. Acts 13-14 and Act 16 seem to be full accounts of the church's establishment in the southern region. It seems to me that it would be very odd for Paul to omit any word of forming churches in the Northern region.
3. In Galatians 4:13, we have Paul visiting the readers of his letter while convalescing from some illness. Given this physical condition, it seems unlikely Paul would be in the Northern region, which was rough country to travel about versus the better road systems of the South.
4. When reviewing Paul's writings, he used provincial names, not geographical ones. In 1 Corinthians 16:1, note he writes "the churches of Galatia". In 1 Corinthians 16:5 he refers to "Macedonia", in 1 Corinthians 16:15 he writes "Achaia", and in 1 Corinthians 16:19, "Asia". "Macedonia", "Achaia", and "Asia" are references to Roman provinces, so I would assume that when Paul uses "Galatia" he also means the Roman province and not the Northern portion of that province, populated mainly by ethnic Gauls.
AMR
[Click image to enlarge]
Why does the destination of the Epistle to the Galatians matter?
1. If it is possible, an accurate identification of the historical context that triggered the Epistle in the first place is always important to know.
2. The date of the Epistle depend upon the destination view one holds. If the Southern Galatia view, then the Epistle was written probably after Paul's second visit to these churches (see Galatians 4:13 and Acts 16:1-4). Judging by Paul's shock that the Galatians were quickly departing from the gospel (see Galatians 1:6), this view means that the letter was likely written very shortly after Paul's visit. Paul may have written the letter while in Corinth, where he was staying during his second missionary journey. If the theory is true, Galatians would be the first or very close to the first of the letters of Paul.
I lean towards the Southern Galatian view for the following reasons:
1. No real references is made of founding churches in the North. In Acts 16:6 and Acts 18:23, we find that Paul may have visited or passed through some northern portions of Galatia while journeying from Antioch to Ephesus, but no reference in these passages in Acts mention the founding of churches in the region. It would be odd for Paul to leave out the Southern churches that were well-known in any correspondence from Paul.
2. Acts 13-14 and Act 16 seem to be full accounts of the church's establishment in the southern region. It seems to me that it would be very odd for Paul to omit any word of forming churches in the Northern region.
3. In Galatians 4:13, we have Paul visiting the readers of his letter while convalescing from some illness. Given this physical condition, it seems unlikely Paul would be in the Northern region, which was rough country to travel about versus the better road systems of the South.
4. When reviewing Paul's writings, he used provincial names, not geographical ones. In 1 Corinthians 16:1, note he writes "the churches of Galatia". In 1 Corinthians 16:5 he refers to "Macedonia", in 1 Corinthians 16:15 he writes "Achaia", and in 1 Corinthians 16:19, "Asia". "Macedonia", "Achaia", and "Asia" are references to Roman provinces, so I would assume that when Paul uses "Galatia" he also means the Roman province and not the Northern portion of that province, populated mainly by ethnic Gauls.
AMR
