ii. The Persons addre.ssed.— These are desig- nated (P) 'the churchesof Galatia.' Alone among the Epp. of St. Paul this is addressed, not to an in- dividual or to any single church, but to a group of churches. Wliere are we to look for these churches? For the name 'Galatia' has a wider and a narrower application (see Galatia). Are ' the cliurclies of G. to be sought for in the geo- graphically limited district inhabited by the Celtio Galatians, or in the wider region comprehended in the Rom. province, G. ? The majority of critics hold that as in the Bk of Ac the term (i. is used in the narrower .sense to denote the district of G. proper, or original, so this Ep. is addres.sed to the churches of that remote country, which prob- ablj' existed in the towns of Ancyra, Pe.^sinus, (Jerma, and Tavium in the N., and no'- to th«
94 GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
churches of Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe in tlie S. Such is the oiiinion, ^^^., of Weiss, Lipjsius, tSieilert, Lij^htfoot, Davidson, and Godet. On the other hand, tlie chiiins of provincial G. have been acivotated by such critics as lienan and Perrot in France; M^-nster, Weizsacker, llaiisrath, Zahn, and Plleiih'rer in Germany. And tiiia opinion has rocuntly been reinforced by the ad- hesion of Prof. \V. M. Ramsay, wliose personal knowledj^'e of Asia Minor and acquaintance with its history lend great weight to his jud^^'inent.
There are three sources from which H^ht upon this question may he sou^'ht : Ihc lik of Ac, the other I'uuhnc Kpp., and this Epistle itsflf. In the Bk of Ac (I3i'*-ll"i') we jiossess a pretty full acx'oimt of the foundation of churches in S. (1., althoug-h it is to be noted that the writer uses the ethno^'raphical names, Lycaonia and Pisidia, and not the pohtical designation of the district, O. On the other hand, no account is t'iven nor any notice taken of the fountiing of churches in N. G. And this silence is not surliciently accounted for by the fact that at the time of the presumed founding of these churches St. Luke was not St. Paul's compaiiiun, for other events of which St. Luke was not an eye-witness are fully described. But if St. Luke joined St. Pant immediately after the apostle had been so warmly received and so successfully engaged in N. G., as by the hypothesis he had been, then certainly it is strange that no notice sliould be taken of so remarkable a mission. No sure conclusion can be based on this silence, but it is more likely that a letter should have been ofldresscd to churches regarding which we have some informa- tion than to those of which St. Luke tells us nothing. For it is to be considered that St. Luke must have known the intense interest which St. Paul took in the churches thus addressed, and would naturally have informed himself and others about them.
The poasage "in the Bk of Ac (16^s) in which St. Paul's route from Derhe and Lystra to Troas is described, has been claimed both by tlie advocates of the N. G. and by the upholders of the S. O. theory. According to Ramsay {Church in Rom. Kjnp. pp. 74-111). this journey was described by one who wrote xnider the immediate influence of St. Paul himself. It must therefore be accepted as exact and intelligible. Antioch in Pisidia may be taken as the starting-point, for probably it was i**hile in that city, and while he was making arningements for pafc;i;?g westwards through Asia to Ephesus, that it was made plain to him that he must not at this time proclaim Christ m Asia. Instead of going W., therefore, he turned to the N. 'And they passed through Phrygia and the region of G.,' and BO reached Mysia. Now, it is not to he denied tliat if any one way so minded it was possible to go from Antioch to Pessinus *n G., and from Pessinus to Germa, and at that point to form the design of entering Bithynia. But in this case the force of the topotxraphicai notice, that it was when they had come over against Mysia that they proposed to enter BiLhynia, is entirely lost.
Accordingly, Prof. Ramsay proposes another route, following the road wliich runs N.W., and not the road which nms N.K. This road would have led St. Paul and his party into Bithynia, but wlien they came so far N. as to be opposite Slysia, that is to say, as to have it Ijing to their left, ' the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not' t-o enter Bithynia, and therefore, turning to the W., they skirted the southern border of Mysia, and so came to Troas. Certainly, this gives a route that has great probability in its favour. For (1) any one proposing to go from Lystra and Derbe to Bithynia would niturally go by the road passing through Dorylaion, and from this road, or any part of it, it would be out of the way to enter G. proper. And (i) to use Prof. Ramsay's words, 'From N. G. no possible route to Bithynia could be said to bring a traveller to a point 'over against Mysia,' still less ' to the frontier of Mysia.' Another strong point in favour of this route and undelayed journey is this, that in vv.6. 7 (Ac 16) a single definite journey is described. The statement, * They passed tiirough Phrygia . . . and when they came opposite Mysia,' seems to leave no room for any such mission in G. as is required by the N. Gal. theory. It ia not easily credible that had St. Paul intercalated into this journey a digression east- wards of about 30(1 miles into N. G., so important a mission would liave been passed over in silence.