(ii.) Various points in the course of the second missionary journey have been suggested : (a) Mace- donia (Hausrath), or (6) Athens (L. Albreclit, Paulus, Munich, 1903, pp. 114 f. ; C. Clemen, Paidus, Giessen, 1904, i. 396 f.), or (c) Corinth (Zahn, Bacon, Kendall). The arguments used in favour of ib) and (c) are that the Epistle must be placed as soon as possible after St. Paul's second visit to Galatia, and at a time which will exjilain the absence of any mention of Silas and 'J'imotliy. Silas and Timothy were not with St. Paul at Athens or at the time of his arrival in Corintli.
(iii.) But any date subsequent to the Council of Jerusalem makes it very dillicult to explain the silence of the Epistle with regard to the Council itself and to its decrees. To some scliolars this argument alone seems sufficient to prove conclu- sively that the Epistle was written before the Council (see Calvin, Beza, Bartlet, Piound, Emmet, Lake). Consequently, it is suggested that St. Paul wrote from Antioch just before going up to the Council of Jerusalem (W. A. Shedd, ExpT xii. [1900-01] ,568 ; Round, Date of Galatians), or in the course of his journey from Antioch to Jerusalem (C. W. Emmet, Expositor, 7th sen, ix. [1910] 242 W. ; I>ake). This theory would be very at- tractive if the absolute historicity of Ac 15 could be established, but grave doubts exist on this point (cf. EBi, art. 'Council of Jerusalem').
Summary. — The date of the Epistle is almost as difficult to determine as its destination. To a large extent the two queistions are intertwined.
If it can be proved, on independent grounds, that the Epistle must liave been written before the events which lie behind the narrative of Ac 15, then the S. Galatian theory must be accepted, and the visit of Gal 2'-'» identitied with that of Ac 11, or with some visit unrecorded in the Acts. On the other hand, if the N. Galatian theory can be es- tablished on independent grounds, the date of the Ejnstle is confined within narrow limits, and is in any case later than the Council. Unfortu- nately, conclusive proof of either position cannot be obtained.
7. Authenticity and permanent value. — (a) Authenticity. — That Galatians is a genuine Epistle written by St. Paul to his converts has never been questioned except by those eccentric critics who deny the existence of any authentic Pauline Epistles [e.g. EBi, art. ' Paul '). Such a theory scarcely needs refutation. Its supporters cut away the ground from beneath their own feet. If no genuine works of St. Paul have survived, no standard of comparison exists by M'hich to decide what is genuinely 'Pauline' and what is not (cf. Knowling, The Witness of the Epistles , pp. 133-243). External testimony to the genuineness of Gala- tians is as strong as can be expected in view of the scantiness of the records of the sub-Apostolic Age. It is quoted as Pauline by Irenaius [c. A.D. 180) and Clem. Alex. (c. A.D. 2U0) ; it is cited by Justin Martyr (c. A.D. 150) and Athenagoras (c. A.D. 170) ; it is included in the canon of Marcion (c. A.D. 140) and in the old Latin version of the NT. Earlier still, clear references to its phrase- ology are found in Polycarp [Phil. iii. 5 [c. A.D. 110]).
The internal evidence of the Epistle is irresist- ible. It is unmistakably the work of a real man combating real opponents. It contains nothing which would explain its motive if it were a forgery, and much that no forger would be likely to have written. The question with which it deals belongs to a very early stage in the history of the Church. The existence before A.D. 70 of large churches of Gentiles who had not been comj>elled to accept circumcision, proves conclusively that by that time the controversy about Gentile circumcision was a thing of the past. Consequently the Epistle must have been written within St. Paul's lifetime, and no valid reason remains for denying the tra- ditional belief that he wrote it.
[b) Permanent value. — The value of the Epistle is unattected by uncertainties concerning its date and destinatioii. It is the most concise and vigor- ous, as Romans is the most systematic, expression of St. Paul's evangel. It displays the A^jostle's power of penetrating to the heart of things. He passes beyond the immediate question of circum- cision and the observance of the Jewish Law to the ultimate principle ■which lies beneath.
Universal experience has shown that men cannot by their own efforts attain perfect righteousness. The power to overcome the inherent weakness of human nature is God's free gift to man in Christ. But man must receive it on God's own terms, 'by faith' — tliatis, by the complete self-surrender which brings him into vital union with Christ's perfect humanity. Such self-surrender is possible to all who realize their own utter helplessness (cf. Mt. 18-) ; but if 'life eternal' (6^) were dependent on the complete obedience to God's will of unaided human nature, it would be for ever beyond man's reach. The truth on which St. Paul so strongly insists lies at the very heart of the Christian faith, and is a living message to all ages.
In pressing home his point, the Apostle uses the dialectic methods of the Rabbinic school in which both he and his opponents received their training — e.g. the play on the word Kardpa (3*') ; the argu-