Individual Exegetical Paper
Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary
Mill Valley, CA
S2521: Biblical Hermeneutics
D. Michael Martin / Spring 2001

I. Canonical and Literary Issues:

The Epistle to the Galatians is a letter written by the Apostle Paul to the church at Galatia. It is found as the ninth book in the New Testament canon and appears as the fourth book written by Paul. The Epistle to the Galatians (hereafter referred to as Galatians) is divided into six chapters. The seven verses of this paper, Chapter 3: verses 23 to 29, are close to the center of the epistle. The divine inspiration of Galatians has never been in doubt and the epistle has been a part of the Christian canon since earliest times.

Galatians is first and foremost an epistle or a correspondence. This is evidenced by the first five verses which contain the epistolary prescript and the last eight verses which contain the epistolary postscript. The body of the letter is a defense speech. Since not all Galatians could read and since writing in longhand was tedious, letters of this sort were read aloud to a congregation. Unlike his pastoral letters, Galatians was composed for the ear and not for the eye. The literary genre of Galatians is an apology, composed of successive arguments. However Paul's apology appears to be more than a series of rhetorical arguments designed to persuade the Galatians to faith. The letter is also a proclamation of the Gospel.

Galatians may best be viewed as a series of God-inspired announcements designed to wake the Galatians up to the faith that has now arrived with the advent of Christ. Polished rhetoric can serve the gospel, but the gospel itself is not fundamentally a matter of rhetorical persuasion, as Paul himself often points out. The letter as a whole "is a rhetorical genre without true analogy in the ancient rhetorical handbooks". (Anchor Bible, p. 15)

One should read Galatians as a highly situational sermon addressed to a particular people who were facing a particular circumstance. For this reason, a serious reader of Galatians should become acquainted with Paul's purpose in writing his letter, the audience to whom he was addressing his letter, and the particular controversy the Galatians were facing in Paul's absence. Reading Galatians is like listening to one end of a telephone conversation. One should hear these words with an appreciation for the unheard half of the conversation.

The seven verses which are the focus of this paper appear in a section of Galatians referred to the probatio. This section runs from 3:1 to 4:31 and constitutes the centerpiece of Paul's apology in a series of six proofs. The seven verses of this paper appear to straddle two paragraphs of thought. Verses 23, 24, and 25 seem to end a discourse on the torah and the promise to Abraham, while verses 26, 27, 28 and 29 begin the fourth proof that is based on baptismal and Christological formulae.

There is no evidence of editing, additions, deletions or modifications in these verses.

The text under consideration is from Galatians, Chapter 3, verses 23 through 29. It is cited below in the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). I identified eight textual variants which are underlined and superscripted from v1 to v8.

²³ Now before faith came, we were imprisoned and guarded under ^v1 the law until faith would be revealed. ²⁴ Therefore the law was ^v2 our disciplinarian until Christ came, so that we might be justified by faith. ²⁵ But now that faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian, ²⁶ for in Christ Jesus ^v4 you are all children of God through faith ^v3. ²⁷ As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. ²⁸ There is no longer ^v5 Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free ^v6, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one ^v7 in Christ Jesus ^v8. ²⁹ And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to the promise.

(V1) In verse 23 there appeared two textual variants both translated as "guarded under". One was sugkekleismenoi and the other was sugkleiomenoi. Scholars considered the first to be the better text. (V2) In verse 24 the English word "was" appears as either gegouen or as egeneto in different manuscripts. gegouen is a perfect aorist and egeneto is second aorist. The first variant is preferred. (V3) In verse 26 some manuscripts leave out the word "your" in the phrase "through your faith." Including the Greek word thV is supported in most manuscripts. (V4) Still in verse 26, some manuscripts use Cristou Ihsou ("of Christ Jesus") rather than en Cristw Ihsou ("in Christ Jesus"). The former Greek words only appear after the 10th Century making en Cristw Ihsou the preferred variant. (V5) In verse 28, some manuscripts include the word ouketi three times, translated best into English as "no longer… no longer … no longer". The opening words ouk eni ("there is neither") is supported in most manuscripts, but opinions differ. (V6) Still in verse 28, some manuscripts have the word h eleuqeroV ("the free") rather than oude eleuqeroV ("nor free"). The text oude eleuqeroV is better supported. (V7) Still in verse 28, some manuscripts have the word en (neuter "one") rather than eiV (masculine "one") in the phrase "you are all one". Most manuscripts support the word eiV. (V8) Finally at the end of verse 28, the words este Cristou appear in some manuscripts. This is not supported by most manuscripts and may have been assimilated from the Cristou of verse 29. Variation one involves a difference in Greek words that is difficult to distinguish in the English. I would follow the preference and go with sugkekleismenoi . Variation two, gegouenv or egeneto, does not appear to change the meaning of the text in any great way. The translation would be the same in English in either case. Variation three, the inclusion of "your" before "faith", makes the sentence more precise or emphatic. I do not think that any pronoun other than "your" would fit the sense of this sentence. The word thV is dispensable and I would dispense with it. Variation four involves either the inclusion or the exclusion of the en. History seems to support its inclusion and I concur. Variation five is difficult. If the sentence were to begin with just ouk eni the final meaning would not be much different than using ouketi three times. The repeated use of ouketi makes the sentence more emphatic. I believe that I would go with the repetition of ouketi, emphasizing our oneness in Christ. Manuscript support seems to go either way. Variation six is between "the free" and "nor free". Manuscript support and parallelism in the sentence makes "nor free" (oude eleuqeros) a preferred variation. Variation seven is between en and eiV. The difference is subtle in Greek and absent in English. Most manuscripts go with eiV and I can follow them. The eighth variation involves inclusion of the words este Cristou at the end of verse 28. This inclusion is not supported by most manuscripts and I would leave it out.

In my opinion, none of these textual variations changes the message contained in Paul's words. Maybe some word is emphasized, or maybe some meaning is made more explicit. I am a novice in Greek and an exegetical neophyte. The only way that I can determine which textual variant is preferred is to read several commentaries and go along with the majority opinion or in some cases go along with the opinion that makes most sense to my untrained reasoning.

One cannot understand verses 23, 24, and 25 in isolation. A reader must look back to the question which begins the paragraph in verse 19: "Why then the law?" The remainder of verse 19, along with verses 20, 21, and 22 begin to answer this question. It is outside the scope of this paper to exegete these verses, but one must understand that the thought is captured in the paragraph and that this paper only deals with the second half of Paul's thought in verses 23 to 25, and not with the entire thought as expressed in verses 19 to 25. Verse 23 continues to answer the question "Why then the law?" and verse 24 provides of summary of the paragraph beginning with the words "so then."

Verses 26 to 29 compose a paragraph that can be studied in comparative isolation from the rest of the text. The syntax of these verses is complicated by the possibility that Paul may be incorporating "sayings" into this paragraph. The question arises, "do we treat these portions as quotes?" If the answer is yes, then this effects our sense of the paragraph. In reading the commentaries and journal articles, two word studies become apparent: one for the word PaidagwgoV (pedagogue) and the other for the Pauline favorite en Cristo (in Christ). In addition to these two word studies, I will consider the linguistic possibility that portions of verses 26, 27, and 28 are excerpted from pre-Pauline liturgies. In just the past week I have found dozens of different English equivalents for the word PaidagwgoV. Below is a table showing twelve selected translations:

Confining Custodian (Anchor Bible)	Slave Guardian (R.C.H. Lempki)	Supervisory Guardian (WBC)
Trainer (J.P Green Interlinear)	School Master (KJV)	Disciplinarian (NRSV)
Custodian (RSV)	Tutor (NEB)	Strict Governess (Phillips)
Protective custody (Living Bible)	Supervision of the law (NIV)	The law (Today's English)

Each one of these English words captures a portion of the meaning, but none adequately conveys what Paul had in mind. The last three translations lose entirely the sense of the law being like a person. The NAC chooses to transliterate "paidagogos" on the grounds that no single word is adequate. This may be true, but I think that a transliteration is a cop out. What modern reader is going understand "paidagogos" while reading through Galatians? Having read through mounds of material in both commentaries and journals here is a succinct comment on the role of an ancient PaidagwgoV :

"At that time [about the age of six] boys came under the supervision of another household servant, the paidagogos, who remained in charge of their upbringing until late adolescence. The pedagogue took over where the nanny left off in terms of offering menial care and completing the process of socialization for the charge. .. The pedagogues also offered round-the-clock supervision and protection to those under their care. (NAC, p 265)" To add three points to this commentary about pedagogues: 1. they were not members of the family; 2. they were not teachers (paideuths) in the sense of teaching book knowledge; and 3. they were customarily strict, "spoiling the fun" of the adolescent boys. In verses 23 and 24, Paul says that the Sinaitic law was like a PaidagwgoV to believers. Unless a modern reader appreciates the wealth of meaning packed into this single word, then Paul's metaphor may crumble, and if Paul's metaphor crumbles, then the reader may lose what Paul is trying to argue concerning the relationship between the Sinaitic law and faith in Christ.

It may be informative to consider this occupational word problem in reverse. Let's imagine that the Apostle Paul is transported to 21st century America. Paul spies a bumper sticker on the GGBTS campus which profoundly proclaims "God is my co-pilot". How would our distinguished scholars translate the word "co-pilot" to Paul's Greek? This is the same kind of problem that modern scholars face in translating the ancient PaidagwgoV into English.

The Greek words en Cristw involve a different kind of word study from PaidagwgoV. Whereas PaidagwgoV appears only in this Galatian passage, en Cristw or cognates appear a total of 172 times in Pauline writings (WBC, p 152). At times en Cristw seems to mean simply "Christian." At other times is carries a more mystical meaning as in verse 28, "… are all one in Christ Jesus." How are these words different from the same words in verse 26, "through faith in Christ Jesus?" Again, how is en Cristw different from "put on Christ" and "into Christ" in verse 27. Many Greek language subtleties are lost in English translation because of Greek preposition proclivity. I believe that in all of these instances, en Cristw speaks of an intimacy with Christ, an experience that Paul wants all his readers to share. The study of en Cristw merits much more space than is possible here.

I found it intriguing that verses 26, 27, and 28, may contain two "sayings", e.g. words from an early Christian confession or baptismal hymn. A few commentaries put in quotation marks: "You are all sons of God through your faith in Christ Jesus." They also put in quotation marks: "As many of you as have been baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Can it be that Paul used these early confessions in support of his thesis statement of verse 26 ("You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus")? It makes sense that Paul would remind his Galatian backsliders of their earlier confessions. Interpreting these two sentences as "sayings" also makes sense in relation to the surrounding content. Why else would Paul unexpectedly comment about slaves and females? Equally intriguing is the proposition that these early confessions may have been formulated to contrast Christianity with contemporary chauvinistic statements. For example the Jewish morning blessing expresses the idea, "Blessed be God who did not make me a gentile, a slave or a woman." From the onset it appears that Christianity was a religion of extraordinary inclusiveness.

The Anchor Bible introduces four "Dramatis Personae". Understanding these four players aided me in following the drama of the Galatian Epistle. First is Paul the writer. His intention was to have his letter read out loud to the church in Galatia. Paul began a missionary church in the Roman province of Galatia in about 49 AD and left it in good spiritual shape. Second are the Galatian Churches. Galatia was a Roman province located in south-central Asia minor and was populated with Hellenized descendants of Celts. The church was composed of uncircumcised gentiles. Third are the catechetical instructors. After Paul moved on to Greece he left his Galatian church in the hands of these faithful followers. Their job was to teach and carry on his mission. These catechists were also the messengers who brought Paul the bad news about the "foolish Galatians." Fourth are the teachers and their followers. These were the traveling Christian-Jewish evangelists who brought a gospel emphasizing circumcision and the Jewish law. In essence they taught that that a believer must first convert to Judaism and only then to Christianity; circumcision first, baptism second.

It is also worthwhile to note the "bad blood" that existed between Paul and the Jewish-Christian teachers. Paul sketches this story in Galatians, chapter 2. There appeared to be three camps of people that convened at the Jerusalem council. The first camp supported the evangelism of Gentiles without first converting them to Judaism. This group included Paul and Barnabas. The second camp Paul dubbed the "false brothers." These unnamed evangelists wanted to convert Gentiles first to Judaism and then to Christ. The third group was equivocal and included Peter, James, and John. These three pillars of the Church eventually backed Paul, apparently without enthusiasm.

How did the Galatian congregation respond when this epistle was first read to them? We do not know. The false teachers seemed entrenched. Without the strong presence of Paul, the Galatian church may have wilted away. Two things are certain. First, this letter survived. Many speculate that a catechist preserved the letter and brought it to Greece for wider distribution. Second, we know that the preaching of the Jewish-Christian evangelists did not survive. The Sinaitic law was a burden that the Gentile world would not bear. Within a few hundred years, the Jewish-Christian movement was extinguished even from Palestine. Paul may have written this epistle for the ears of a few hundred long-forgotten Galatians, but for 2000 years his words have illuminated and fortified Christians. His metaphor of the paidagwgoV remains unsurpassed as a means of explaining the relationship between the law and grace. The "unity in Christ" verse inspired American abolitionists in the 19th century and continues to motivate feminists who write for the need of a more inclusive church. A computer search in the GGBTS library found 52 journal articles that focus on this single verse. Verse 28 is also noted in the SBC's Resolution on Racial Reconciliation of 1995. (The words are quoted but with the caveat "with respect to salvation in Christ"). Both feminist Christians and African-American Christians focus on Galatians 3: 28. The two perspective books referenced in this bibliography address speak of this verse, one centering on "male nor female" and the other on "slave nor free". These ancient words of Paul are as revolutionary today as when they were first heard in Galatia about 2000 years ago.

The only word in this passage that is truly problematic is of course paidagwgoV. I toyed with words like "drill sergeant" or "scoutmaster" but not many modern Americans have enlisted in the army or in the boy scouts. After hours of rumination, I settled upon the word "chaperone" as the closest equivalent for modern American readers. Webster's New World Dictionary defines chaperone as "an older person who accompanies young unmarried people in public or is present at their parties, dances, etc., for the sake of propriety or to supervise their behavior". Any Baptist who thinks back to junior high days can remember the role of their chaperone. The modern chaperone is not the perfect equivalent of the paidagwgoV ; for instance the chaperone is not a servant, does not do personal grooming, and is not "in your face" 24-hours-a-day for ten years. However, chaperone does focus on the adolescent years, unlike nanny or baby-sitter. Unlike teacher it also focuses on reigning in behavior, not on formal instruction. Chaperones are usually not members of the family. In addition to choosing the word chaperone, I also decided to put the sayings in quotations marks. Because I am paraphrasing this section, textual variants are submerged in phrasing. My modern paraphrase therefore reads:

But before the arrival of faith, we were controlled by the law, waiting for faith to reveal itself. So the Law was a kind of strict chaperone over us, until Christ came, that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we can dismiss our chaperone, for we have grown up to become the sons and daughters of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For "if you were baptized into Christ, you became Christ-like". "There are no longer distinctions between Jew and Greek, slave and free, female and male; for you are united in Christ Jesus." And if you are united with Christ then you are true descendents of Abraham and heirs of his promise.

I can build two separate expositions based on these seven verses. The first exposition deals with the word paidagwgoV and the relationship of the law to grace. The second deals with the inclusiveness of Christ as voiced in the baptismal hymn, "we are united in Christ".

In my GGBTS Ethics class we learned that scholars divide their approach to ethics as either "deontological" or teleological." The deontological approach is based upon following laws, rules, principles or concepts. Ethics is behind pushing you. This was the ethic of the false gospel preached by the Jewish-Christian evangelists. With a teleological approach you are being pulled toward a goal. Paul was proclaiming a teleological gospel, the aim of which was to become Christ-like.

I see three two levels of metaphor for the paidagwgoV . The first level is in religious history. The Sinaitic law represented a deontological religion and like a paidagwgoV it chaperoned religious behavior. With the arrival of Christ believers are free from the law, justified by faith, saved by grace. The true gospel, the one that Paul proclaimed, is teleological. True religion no longer needs a strict chaperone. At a second level of metaphor, each individual requires a spiritual paidagwgoV up through their adolescent years. Our parents usually serve this function. Most Baptist youth experience a deontological upbringing emphasizing "thou shalt nots". Upon reaching the age of 18, constraining rules are gone. As our moniker proclaims, mature "Christians" are to become "little Christs". Our vary label implies is a teleological gospel. At level one, Christianity waited thirty centuries "for the fullness of time" under the watchful care of a Sinaitic chaperone. At level two, our parents lose the role of chaperone when we reached the age of majority. As free Christian adults, we pursue Christ-likeness as our ethic.

My job is teaching computers to beginners. As I instruct, I see myself using both a deontological and a teleological approach. At the very beginning we follow the book carefully, step-by-step, learning the right way to do things. Toward the end of the class, instruction suddenly becomes teleological. We do not abandon the rules we learned earlier, but I tell my students "see this picture in the book. Make your spreadsheet look like this". They see the goal. They have practiced the rules. Now they strive to imitate the perfect. This mirrors the relationship of law to grace.

Finally, I will be traveling to the broken nation of Rwanda this coming July. As well as proclaiming the gospel, I will be preaching "peace and reconciliation". The recent genocide that took place in this desperate country breaks my heart. In God's sovereignty, the same events that break my heart have opened the hearts of thousands in Rwanda. I have been asked to prepare five sermons. One sermon will surely be based on Galatians 3:28, "we are united in Christ". Along the triune formula used by Paul, I plan to add: "For if you are baptized into Christ, you are to become Christ-like". "There are no longer distinctions between Africans and Europeans, colonialist and native, Hutu and Tutsi; for you are all united in Christ Jesus." As it was in Paul's time, so it is still today; "we are one in Christ". Amen.