I

lei.Burtoa,

I

f

Ace. No.

10.7Keep Your Card in This PocketBookswill,

b

only on

of

for

ttrnqy Me

Unfew labW dfewwiwi, bur weeks. or muuattd w

mrto

b

fo!

&|1l

Its!

wtfl

to

b

4!

w^WflWt forfor

Ttb card Wcter fa mil card.

fcr ill

toc*i drawn

2o

Public LibraryKansasCity,

Mo*

Keep

fow Card iaTfci

KANSAS HIV, MO

PIlBi

ICtlBRARY

DD01 02fl0732

fl

A CRITICAL AND EXEGET1CAL

COMMENTARYON

THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANSBY

DE WITT BURTON

TH E NTERN AllON/CLI

'

A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL COMMENTARYON

THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANSBY

ERNEST DK WITT BURTONOFOf CtttCAOOIMP

f

y JO

CAFYMimT,

1940,

IV

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONSPublfaWKtwntttwr,

S>

TO MY WIFE

FRANCES MARY BURTONrr.i.i,ow.*tinr

OF SPIRIT IN THIS TASKt'ONHTANT

HA*

llfilN

PREFACE

Commentary, it was with a clear conviction make any appreciable contribution to the of the epistle, it would be by confining myself understanding to a few of the several lines of study which an interpreter mightof this to

WHENthatif

In 1806 1 began work upon the Epistle to the Gaiatians with definite reference to the preparation

I

was

I decided not. to attempt projwrly and profitably undertake. an exhaustive study of the history of the interpretation of the epistle, or of the rabbinic writings and method of exegesis. Convinced that, despite all that had been clone in the study of the vocabulary of the New Test amen t, much remained still to be doms study would strongly inclined to expect that

aid

in the

recovery of the primary elements of the

of the apostle Paul, persuaded also that such lexkowould prepare the way for a clearer {xirceptioncif

course of thought of the epistle, I determined, while not neglecting other linn* of study, to give my chief atten* tion, ftr*t, in a fresh historical study of the vocabulary of the Irttrr, and thru to an endeavour to trace its couroc of thoughtflic

tofttt*

it,

with cl> to the question whether Paul had made a second visit to Galatia only the probability that there had been some communication from Paul to the Galatians between the evangelising visit and this letter. Cf.

the utterance This, However, if accepted, would not decide whether 9 in person or letter (since wpoetp^xatiev in i can, just as well as was refer to a written statement), and the present verse contributes

above on

v. 14

and below on

v. 20 .

17. fiyXDvcrw v}J,a$ ov lv& avrot/5 J*7?Xoi)T6. "They zealously seek you, not honestly, but wish to shut you out that ye may seek them." In contrast

with his own frank truthfulness by which he risked incurring

and actually incurred the suspicion of hostilitythe apostle declares that they

to the Galatians,

much as a pronoun but

his opponents, unnamed by so are courting clearly enough referred to(cf.

the favour of the Galatians, not honourably

not sincerely and unselfishly, but with from which these opponents of Paul wish to exclude the Galatians is not stated; the context implies either (a) the privilege of the gospel, i. 0., the sense of acceptance with God whichselfish

Heb. i3 18), i. 0., That motive.

those have

who

believe themselves to

have

fulfilled 'the

divine

requirements, or (b) the circle of those

view, Paul and his that the Gentiles are accepted if they have faith and without of the law. In either case, the effect fulfilling the requirements

who hold the broader and converts, who maintain companions

of such exclusion would be that the Galatians would turnto the Jewish Christians for guidance and association, and the latter would be in the position of being sought after(J*^Xoi)r).

The verb

e/ocXT irdvroT, Kal povov fy ry "But it is good to be zealously sought irap&val juc TTP& v/utej

2W)

is

18. KaXoy Sc ftyXotkrflat

^

IV,after in

17-18

247

a good thing, always, and not only when I am present with you." Most probably a reference to his own persistent seeking after the Galatians, which he by implication characterises as & Ka\> in contrast with that of the judaisers, which was ov fcaXw, and for the continuance of which, even while absent, he justifies himself by this statement, enforced by v. 19 This.

interpretation retains as the implied subject of the passive 17b and best %i)\ov(Tdai the object of the active f^Xovre in v. , with the tone of v. 19 into which he passes from this v, comports

apparently without break in thought.must be taken as a passive, no instance of the middle being found elsewhere, and there being no occasion for change from active to middle form. Iv %a>4 defines the sphere in which alone xaXfcvjXouff6at is true.

IC&VTOTS.

is

phrase,

seal ^f)

.

.

xpfcg 6[Aa. fasvriv iwv, Srt ampovn&i

&

present with you now, and to change

my

tone; because I

am

in perplexity in reference to you." Moved by his deep sense of the unhappy situation in Galatia (v. 11 ), stirred by his strongaffection for the Galatians (v, 19 )

and

in

doubt as to what the out-

come might bethetold

(6rt,

dropou/m

eV t>/u^), the apostle regrets for

momentthem

the strong language which he had used when he the truth, and so gave occasion for its being subse-

16 quently said that he had become their enemy (v. ), and expresses the fervent wish, evidently regarded as impossible to be carried out, that he were even now (apri) with them and

could speak in a different tone from that which he had used on that other occasion. For an entirely similar instance of strong

language subsequently for a time regretted, see 2 Cor. 7*, and for the letter to which he there refers, 2 Cor,, chaps. 11-13.

On *56eXov, cf. 'EM T 33; Rob. 885 /. The wish is evidently regarded as impracticable, though not distinctly characterised as such by thewith more sharply defined reference to the present means "at this very moment." The clause Stc . . . Iv fiitfv "suggests for ,

GALATIANSa late Greek word not found in the Lxx, and,

here only in N. T., occurs first in Strabo i. 2 T though Classical writers used occurs as early as Demosthenes.

Proem, 24 (4), where and &ic6vow of an underlying figurative or allegorical meaning: Xen, Symp. 3'; Plato. Rep, 378 D; cf. Philo, Vita contempl. 28 (3). The meanings of iXXTiyopIcain the sense, "to speak in riddles"aEvf-nrotxat(cf.

Jos. Ant.

and

dtXXujYop&o occur together),

are as follows:1.

To

meaning than that of the words taken'atteg.

speak allegorically, to utter something which has another the object of the literally

verb or subject in the passive being the words uttered: Philo, Leg. II 5 (2): flcXXcb xal Tauxa 9uatxtog dtXXTQyopei. Mut. nom. 67 (9);(4); Clem. Alex. Paed. I 45 (chap, vi); Porphyr. In the passive, to be spoken allegorically: Porphyr. VUa Pythag. 12; Origen, Cels. 438 : *Hat68 eSp^va Iv tx60ou

Jos.

AnL Proem.Nymph.4.

24

Antr.

acepl

T%

yuvatx.2>u ) Of law In the sense which is gained by isolating the purely legalistic element of from O. T. and speaking of it by Itself, Paul say very different that which he says of the law as the will of God broadly and justlyis evil,

cm

understood.It is of great

law la the

Importance for the understanding of Paul to rttcognbte that was an actual, not a merely hypothetical, existlegalisticit

of GtxF action was never alone and by itself the There never was a period of pure legalium except in the erroneous thoughts of men. Might not one argue in aomewhat the dement way about the kw of war? Had he maintained that this In God'n thus Isolated In fact before the coming of Christ held full government of the world, unqualified by covenant or ethical principle, he an would for this would have on every who In any of have proiiomccd

ence, yet that

towards men*

failed to fulfil all the

of the law.

It

that he does this In Gal,

j.not

Buthethe3* 4S

thfe ire the

urged:(Gal.

fit that

in this very

0. T. iof

the

contrary 01 this

Godthe

3); andof divine

that bt of the

he

wiittea fa

ttat

perfect 'conformity ta all the at fa

NOMOSpurpose and conduct.in Gal.,

453

And when we examine his language in the passage he does not say that God deals with men on the basis of such legalism, or that law so understood actually held unqualified sway, but only that law in that sense in which it can be set over against the otherwefind that

teaching of scripture, pronounces such sentence. It is necessary, therefore, to understand him as here isolating law in thought and affirming of it that

whichit

is true of it as a legal system pure and simple, but not affirming that constituted the total basis of God's relation to men.

Had Paul qualified this absolute legalism by the Pharisaic notion of God's covenant (that is, if separating ef both from be and from gh, he had combined it with Im and called this the law), he would have used the term practically as the Pharisee used it, and if he had believed this to represent God'sdoes indeed show that heactual attitude to men, he would have held the Pharisaic doctrine. He is familiar with this notion of law, and in speak-

n he comes so near to using ing of the Jewish position, notably in Rom. 2 the term in this sense that we should not seriously misrepresent Ms thought,

if

We should takeit is

even heresense

wLkh

the term as representing this Pharisaic thought* Yet perhaps best to suppose that Paul was using the term in a represented for him a reality, viz., as referring to the law as anC/. 2 (a), p. 455.

actual historic regime.

But Paul did not always emphasise the purely legalistic element when he resolved law into its elements. In truth, it was rather the element of ethical principle than that, of formulated statute, gk rather than e/, that

was

represented for Paul the true will of Clod, the real v6(i,onenta, he could use the word with exclusive emphasis upon the ethical principles of the law* This heclearly

docs in Gal. s 14

;

I y^p