(d) Christolvgy. — The Divinity of Christ is taken for granted (4^). The reality of His human nature is indicated by references to His birth of a woman (4^), His nationality (31"), His Crucifixion (3'), and His Resurrection (li). That He is man not individ- ually but inclusively {i.e. not ' a man ' but ' man '), is shown by the whole argument of the Epistle, which rests on the conviction that 'by faith 'all men may share the power of His perfect human nature (2'»- 2« 4)9).
His redemptive work centres in His death. He 'gave himself for our sins,' thereby 'delivering us from the present age with all its evils' (l-*). He ' redeemed ' us from the curse pronounced by the Law, by Himself ' becoming a curse for us ' (3'^- 1* 4^), i.e. by dying a death which the Law describes as accursed (Dt2F3).*
(e) The Holy Spirit. — The indwelling of the Holy
*Dt212S '^i^ij Q'n^x n^^p means not that 'a curse rests on him who is impaled,' but that 'his unburied corpse is an insult to the God of the land which by its presence It defiles.' St. Paul quotes the LXX, which takes D'hSn wrongly as subjective genitive. St. Paul means simply 'Christ died a death in con- nexion with the outward circumstances of which the Law mentions a curse.'
GALATIAXS, EPISTLE TO THE
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 43:^
Spirit is the evidence of our adoption into tlie family of God (4'- "). His presence is manifested in the in- ward sense of sonship (■i'^), and outwardly in works of power (3^) and in the manifold Christian graces (5-'-^-)- He is persoually distinct from the Father and the Son, yet the three act as one, ' The Father sends the Spirit of the Son ' (4'').
4. Relation to other books of the NT. — (n) Gala- Hans and Arts. — The autobiographical details given by St, Paul in Gal li-'-2''* cover a period of which a second account is provided by the writer of Acts. The task of reconciling the two narratives is beset by many difficulties, most of which centre round St. Paul's two visits to Jerusalem.
(1) The Epistle asserts that St. Paul's conversion was followed by a visit to Arabia, a ' return ' to Damascus, and then, ' after three years,' a visit to Jerusalem. This visit is described as being of a purely private nature. St. Paul saw none of the apostles except St. Peter and St. James, and de- parted to Syria and Cilicia unknown even by sight to the faitliful in Judiea (P*'"-^).
Acts, on tiie other hand, seems to imply that after his conversion St. Paul returned directly from Damascus to Jerusalem (9'^"-^). The expression ws 5^ £Tr\r]povvTo iifiipai Uaval (9^) suggests that the Apostle spent a considerable time at Damascus, but nothing is said concerning any visit to Arabia. Moreover, the description in Acts of his visit to Jerusalem diti'ers considerably from tliat in the Epistle. It speaks of a period of public preaching suliiciently widely known to give rise to Jewish plots against his life (9-^*-)- If this be true, it is difficult to believe that St. Paul's stay in the city was limited to fifteen days (Gal 1^*), or that he was unknown by sight to the Cliristians of Judaea, un- less it be assumed that ' Judtea' means the outlying districts exclusive of Jerusalem (cf. Zee 12^ li^^^).
Yet it is clear that both accounts refer to the same visit, for both place it between St. Paul's return from Damascus and his departure to Cilicia (Ac 9^", Gal 1-^). Nor do tlie two narratives appear irreconcilable, when the difierent objects with which they were Avritten are borne in mind. St. Paul's purpose was to give a complete account of iiis move- ments so far as they brought him into contact with the apostles. Consequently, in connexion with his visit to Jerusalem, he omits everything except his intercourse with Cephas and James. The object of the writer of Acts was to trace the growth of the Church. He might well omit, as irrelevant to his purpose, all mention of St. Paul's visit to Arabia, which the Apostle himself describes as a temporary absence in the course of a long stay in Damascus {vTrearpe^a [Gal 1'']).
(2) Gal 2'""* describes a second occasion, when St. Paul visited Jerusalem in company with Barnabas, and interviewed the apostles of the circumcision. According to Acts, St. Paul and Barnabas went up to Jerusalem togetlier twice :* {a) during the famine of A.D. 46 (A.C IP" 12-5) . (^) at the time of the so- called Council of Jerusalem (Ac 15^) some years later. By Ramsay, Lake, Emmet, and other scholars, the visit of Gal 2^"^'* is identified with (a); by Lightfoot, Zahn, and the majority of modern critics with (b).
In favour of the former identification it is urged : (i. )That the natural inference from the language of the Epistle is that St. Paul's second interview with the other apostles occurred during his second visit to Jerusalem, and Acts places his second visit in the time of the famine ; (ii.) that, in three details at least, the circumstances of Gal 2^"^" agree with the account of Ac H-'^-ao ; the journey was suggested ' by revelation ' (Gal 2\ Ac IP^) ; St. Paul's com-