THE APOSTLE OF THE RECONCILIATION

the epistle to a period subsequent to Acts 18:23 is entirely removed. Both Ramsay and Weber believe that

`Galatians' was written from Antioch. Ramsay views Acts 13 and Acts 16 as the two visits; Weber considers the

outward and homeward journeys of 13 and 14 suffice.

It is strange that Paul makes no reference to the `Decrees', and this silence is taken as an indication that the

epistle was written before Acts 15. Further, it has been said, the Judaisers could hardly `compel' circumcision

(6:12), after the decision at Jerusalem (Acts 15). Peter's action in Galatians 2 is also much more difficult to

understand if after Acts 15. Altogether, everything is favourable to an early date for the epistle, and we believe we

shall not be wrong in placing it first in chronological order.

Since writing this Chapter, the author has come across a small book (The Date of Galatians by Douglas Round),

dealing with the date of the epistle, in which the writer, while accepting the South Galatian view of Professor

Ramsay, does not accept the late date suggested by him, but argues very strongly for the position which we have felt

to be the true one, namely, the earliest of all the epistles. We quote his own opening words:

`Before the appearance of his (Prof. Ramsay's) books setting out the South Galatian theory, the epistle to the

Galatians seemed to be in the air, and to have no relation to the Acts of the Apostles or to any other writing. His

brilliant work illuminated what had been before a dark corner. The interest so aroused led me to study the

subject more closely, and eventually to form the opinion expressed in these pages, as to the earlier date of the

epistle. The later date was the burden laid by necessity upon the holders of the North Galatian theory. Prof.

Ramsay might have cast off the burden so inherited. Instead of so doing, he gratuitously (as it seems to me) tied

the burden round his neck to the great injury of the South Galatian theory'.

Without going through all the controversy raised in this book, we give the following summary of the essential

(1) Was the epistle written before or after Acts 15?

(2) The private conference of Galatians 2 took place upon the second visit of the apostle to Jerusalem, which was

that of Acts 11:30. The reference to `the poor', and Paul's expressed readiness, coincide with the errand of mercy

mentioned in Acts 11:30.

(3) After the private conference at Jerusalem, Peter dissembles at Antioch. The question at issue at Antioch was

not, `Should the Gentiles be circumcised?' that had been settled; but, `Should the circumcised eat with the

uncircumcised?' On this point Peter wavered. Peter felt the force of the rebuke, and acted accordingly at the public

Council (Acts 15).

(4) Paul paid the Galatian churches two visits (Acts 13). The return visit was important. The faith which the

apostle had preached (13:39), they were exhorted to `continue in' (14:22), and the persecution which they knew the

apostle suffered (13:50) was a part of their expectation also -`we must through much tribulation enter the kingdom

of God'.

(5) While the apostle abode at Antioch for `a long time', some of the emissaries from Jerusalem went on to

Galatia. The result of their visit is recorded in Galatians 1:6. Paul at once, from Antioch, and just before the

conference of Acts 15, wrote the epistle.

(6) The contention which necessitated the conference necessitated the epistle.

(7) The decrees, formulated by the Council, are never mentioned in the epistle. If the apostle had received them,

he would be obliged in all honesty, to have said so. Further, the fact that these decrees practically endorsed the

exemption of the Gentiles from the Law was a strong argument for the apostle. If the epistle had been written after

Acts 15, would not the apostle have settled the question at once by reference to the decrees?

In the epistle we can have no doubt the apostle uses the strongest arguments that at the time of writing were

possible. The close connection between Acts 13 and the epistle is also an argument for nearness in point of time.

He argues in the epistle as though his teaching would be still clearly remembered.

Galatians 4:20 suggests a desire to revisit them. Why did he not go? The simple reason was that he was obliged

to go up to Jerusalem for the conference instead.