1 Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 33A; New York: Doubleday, 1997) 23Google Scholar.

2 Cf. Martyn, J. L., ‘Apocalyptic Antinomies’, Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul (Nashville: Abingdon, 1997) 121–2Google Scholar; Galatians, 104, 573.

3 ‘Events in Galatia: Modified Covenantal Nomism Versus God's Invasion of the Cosmos in the Singular Gospel: A Response to J. D. G. Dunn and B. R. Gaventa’, Pauline Theology 1: Thessalonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon (ed. Bassler, J. M.; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991) 174Google Scholar. Martinus C. de Boer follows Martyn in arguing that the law was not given by God (cf. Gal 3.19), and that ‘there is a huge chasm between God's promise to Abraham…and the law of Moses’ (Galatians: A Commentary [NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2011] 236)Google Scholar. J. Christiaan Beker goes so far as to say: ‘[t]he “Jewish” dispensation of circumcision and the Torah has only been a curse and an obstacle’ (Paul the Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life and Thought [Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1980] 51)Google Scholar. Although he does not follow Martyn's apocalyptic interpretation of Galatians, G. Walter Hansen also finds that Paul's argument in Galatians ‘bypasses the Mosaic law and the Jewish nation as channels for the reception of the promises to Abraham’ (Abraham in Galatians: Epistolary and Rhetorical Contexts [JSNTSup 29; Sheffield: JSOT, 1989] 129)Google Scholar. Occupying a mediating position, Bruce Longenecker nevertheless concludes that ‘it may be that, on the basis of Galatians, a notion of a linear salvific history…must be relegated to the position of a peripheral extra in Pauline theology’ (The Triumph of Abraham's God: The Transformation of Identity in Galatians [Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1998] 175)Google Scholar.

4 Dunn, J. D. G., The Theology of Paul's Letter to the Galatians (New Testament Theology; Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1993) 41CrossRefGoogle Scholar; similarly Wright, N. T., ‘Gospel and Theology in Galatians’, Gospel in Paul: Studies on Corinthians, Galatians and Romans for Richard N. Longenecker (ed. Jervis, L. A. and Richardson, P.; JSNTSup 108; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1994) 232Google Scholar; Hays, R. B., The Faith of Jesus Christ: An Investigation of the Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3.1–4.11 (Biblical Resource Series; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2nd ed. 2001) xxxviiGoogle Scholar; cf. also Wakefield, A. H., Where to Live: The Hermeneutical Significance of Paul's Citations from Scripture in Galatians 3.1–14 (Academia Biblica 14; Leiden: Brill, 2003) 55, 64–5Google Scholar.

5 For an overview of the debate regarding salvation history, see Longenecker, Triumph; cf. also several of the essays in Longenecker, B. W., ed., Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002)Google Scholar. J. Christiaan Beker, whose understanding of discontinuity resembles that of Martyn, also sees salvation history as an important heuristic category in the interpretation of Galatians. To him, ‘Galatians 3 focuses on the fundamental principles of salvation-history’, even though ‘the hermeneutical key is the discontinuity of salvation-history’ (The Triumph of God: The Essence of Paul's Thought [Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990] 50, 53Google Scholar).

6 A most diverse band of scholars follows Martyn in identifying ‘What time is it?’ as the central question of Galatians, e.g., Vouga, F., An die Galater (HNT 10; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998) 115Google Scholar; Witherington, B. III, Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Galatians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998) 345Google Scholar; Hays, R. B., ‘The Letter to the Galatians’, The New Interpreter's Bible, vol. 11 (Nashville: Abingdon, 2000) 224, 292Google Scholar; Rastoin, M., Tarse et Jérusalem: La double culture de l'Apôtre Paul en Galates 3,6–4,7 (AnBib 152; Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2003) 80Google Scholar; Wakefield, Where to Live, 175; Jackson, T. R., New Creation in Paul's Letters: A Study of the Historical and Social Setting of a Pauline Concept (WUNT 2/272; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010) 108Google Scholar; Starling, D. I., Not My People: Gentiles as Exiles in Pauline Hermeneutics (BZNW 184; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011) 44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Dunn, J. D. G., The Epistle to the Galatians (BNTC; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1993) 209Google Scholar; similarly Hansen, Abraham in Galatians, 132; Hays, The Faith, xli; Lee, S. M., The Cosmic Drama of Salvation: A Study of Paul's Undisputed Writings from Anthropological and Cosmological Perspectives (WUNT 2/276; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010) 204Google Scholar.

8 In Pauline usage elsewhere, the participle is clearly used in a temporal sense when it is contrasted with μέλλων (Rom 8.38; 1 Cor 3.22). Temporality is also most likely in view when Paul speaks of the present crisis (τὴν ἐνεστῶσαν ἀνάγκην; 1 Cor 7.26).

9 Cf. Thiselton, A. C., The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000) 165Google Scholar.

10 In the disputed Paulines, the temporal associations are more pronounced, as ὁ αἰὼν οὗτος is contrasted with ὁ αἰὼν μέλλων (Eph 1.21) and there are references to ὁ νῦν αἰών (1 Tim 6.17; 2 Tim 4.10; Tit 2.12).

11 Cf. CEB; ESV; HCSB; NAB; NASB; NEB; NET; NIV; NRSV; REB; RSV.

12 Cf. ASV; CEV; KJV; NJB; NLT.

13 Similarly, Longenecker, Triumph, 37.

14 Richard Longenecker observes that ‘Paul also uses κόσμος as a synonym for αἰών to denote not just the present period of world history but also the way of life that characterizes it (cf. 1 Cor 1.20; 2.12; 3.19; 7.31)’ (Galatians [WBC 41; Dallas: Word, 1990] 9Google Scholar). According to de Boer, ‘the two ages are not only temporal epochs but also two spheres or zones in which certain powers hold sway or in which certain kinds of activity take place’ (Galatians, 32; similarly, Bonnard, P., L’Épître de Saint Paul aux Galates [CNT 9; Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé, 1972] 21Google Scholar; Martyn, Galatians, 102 n. 65). Christof Landmesser observes: ‘Eine deutliche eschatologische Zeit- oder auch Raumeinteilung findet sich bereits in Gal 1,4’ (‘Eschatologie im Galaterbrief und im Römerbrief’, Eschatologie—Eschatology: The Sixth Durham–Tübingen Research Symposium: Eschatology in Old Testament, Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity [Tübingen, September, 2009] [ed. Eckstein, H. -J., Landmesser, C. and Lichtenberger, H.; WUNT 272; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011] 233Google Scholar; similarly Vouga, Galater, 19–20).

15 The value of this parallel will of course depend somewhat on one's view of the authorship of Colossians. However, scholars agree that Colossians is strongly influenced by Paul, whatever his involvement in the writing process may have been. See especially Sumney, J. L., Colossians: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2008) 1–9Google Scholar.

16 Translating ‘damit er uns herausreisse aus dem gegenwärtigen bösen Äon’, Franz Mussner observes that ‘dieser Äon [ist] als bedrohliche Macht verstanden’ (Der Galaterbrief [HTKNT 9; Freiburg: Herder, 1974] 51Google Scholar). Hans-Dieter Betz emphasizes that Paul refers to ‘liberation “out of” the evil aeon’ as opposed to a change of aeons (Galatians [Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979] 42Google Scholar).

17 Winfried Elliger observes that the phrase ἐν Χριστῷ serves ‘as a characterization of one's realm of existence’ (‘ἐν’, EDNT 1.448).

18 This correspondence between being ‘in Christ’ and ‘in the law’ is also noted by Burton, E. de. W., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1920) 124Google Scholar. The use of the phrase ἐν νόμῳ/ἐν τῷ νόμῳ for a person who is under the domain of the law is unique to Paul in the NT (cf. Rom 2.12; 3.19; Phil 3.6). Elsewhere it is only used to refer to something that is textually written in the law of Moses.

19 The prospect of exclusion from the community may well be implied if the main thought is that of castration. A eunuch would be excluded from the assembly of God, according to Deut 23.1. Similarly, Burton, Galatians, 289; Schlier, H., Der Brief an die Galater (KEK 9; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 5th ed. 1971) 240–1Google Scholar; C. Barrett, K., Freedom and Obligation: A Study of the Epistle to the Galatians (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1985) 70Google Scholar; Lührmann, D., Galatians: A Continental Commentary (trans. Dean, O. C. Jr.; CC; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992) 98Google Scholar; Dunn, Galatians, 283; Vouga, Galater, 126; Witherington, Galatians, 374.

20 See Kwon, Y.-G., Eschatology in Galatians: Rethinking Paul's Response to the Crisis in Galatia (WUNT 2/183; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004) 192–5Google Scholar and especially Barclay, J. M. G., Obeying the Truth: A Study of Paul's Ethics in Galatians (Studies of the New Testament and its World; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1988) 75–105Google Scholar.

21 ’Επάθητε in Gal 3.4 should probably be given its full weight according to its prevalent usage and be translated ‘suffered’, rather than simply ‘experienced’. So Lightfoot, J. B., St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians: A Revised Text with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations (London: Macmillan, 4th ed. 1874) 135Google Scholar; Baasland, E., ‘Persecution: A Neglected Feature in the Letter to the Galatians’, ST 38 (1984) 142Google Scholar; Jewett, R., ‘The Agitators and the Galatian Congregation’, NTS 17 (1970–71) 203Google Scholar; Bruce, F. F., The Epistle to the Galatians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982) 150Google Scholar; Goddard, A. J. and Cummins, S. A., ‘Ill or Ill-Treated? Conflict and Persecution as the Context of Paul's Original Ministry in Galatia’, JSNT 52 (1993) 119Google Scholar.

22 Cf. Susan Eastman, who argues that ‘problems arise when [Paul's testimony] is understood primarily in simple temporal terms’. She finds in Galatians an ‘interweaving of temporal narrative and relational language’ (Recovering Paul's Mother Tongue: Language and Theology in Galatians [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007] 56Google Scholar).

23 See. e.g., Donaldson, T. L., ‘The “Curse of the Law” and the Inclusion of the Gentiles: Galatians 3.13-14’, NTS 32 (1986) 94–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Morales, R. J., The Spirit and the Restoration of Israel: New Exodus and New Creation Motifs in Galatians (WUNT 2/282; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010) 105–9, 113–14, 121–2Google Scholar.

24 Pace Donaldson, ‘“Curse of the Law”’; Longenecker, B. W., ‘Sharing in their Spiritual Blessings? The Stories of Israel in Galatians and Romans’, Narrative Dynamics in Paul (ed. Longenecker) 66Google Scholar; Morales, Spirit.

25 Similarly, Eastman, Paul's Mother Tongue, 38–43. Martyn observes: ‘they are to become like him in regarding themselves as former Jews (4.5)’ (Galatians, 420).

26 Similarly, Cosgrove, C. H., The Cross and the Spirit: A Study in the Argument and Theology of Galatians (Louvain: Peeters, 1988) 69–70Google Scholar. Robin Scroggs observes that ‘Paul's interest in the past is for the sake of the present’ (‘Salvation History: The Theological Structure of Paul's Thought [1 Thessalonians, Philippians, and Galatians]’, Pauline Theology 1 [ed. Bassler] 221).

27 Betz observes: ‘Paul's claim that there is no difference is hyperbolic, since legally there is a vast difference between a free person and a slave’ (Galatians, 203).

28 Scholars who maintain that Galatians emphasizes the special place of Israel in salvation history also recognize that Israel and the Galatians were in the same position with respect to the elements (Donaldson, ‘“Curse of the Law”’, 96; Dunn, Galatians, 226). Johannes Woyke argues that the elements, both in the case of the Torah and in the case of the former Galatian paganism, served as instruments of God's punishment (‘Nochmals zu den “schwachen und unfähigen Elementen” [Gal 4.9]: Paulus, Philo und die στοῖχεια τοῦ κόσμου’, NTS 54 [2008] 231).

29 Cf. Betz, Galatians, 203.

30 The term is poorly attested in Greek literature, but quite common in inscriptions, where it is used to identify a person as someone's adopted son, sometimes with indication of the time of adoption. Cf. MM; Deissmann, A., Bible Studies (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1901) 239Google Scholar.

31 The inconsistency is duly noted by Scott, J. M., Adoption as Sons of God: An Exegetical Investigation into the Background of Huiothesia in the Pauline Corpus (WUNT 2/48; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992) 123–5Google Scholar. Scott's solution is to see the passage as referring to Israel's enslavement in Egypt before the exodus. For a critique of his interpretation, see Goodrich, J. K., ‘Guardians, not Taskmasters: The Cultural Resonances of Paul's Metaphor in Galatians 4.1–2’, JSNT 32 (2010) 251–84Google Scholar.

32 If Paul held the conviction that there was a remnant of Israel that had remained faithful to the Lord (as many interpreters understand Rom 9.27–29; 11.4–5, but see Barclay, J. M. G., ‘Paul's Story: Theology as Testimony’, Narrative Dynamics in Paul [ed. Longenecker] 151)Google Scholar, it is possible that this conviction explains the concept of an underage heir in Gal 4.1–2. The remnant was God's faithful people and therefore enjoyed the status as his children, but they were also bound to the Sinai covenant and therefore under guardians and trustees. Whether or not Paul held such a conviction at the time when he wrote his letter to the Galatians, it plays no role in his argument in the letter.

33 Similarly, Barclay, J. M. G., ‘Paul, the Gift and the Battle over Gentile Circumcision’, ABR 58 (2010) 54Google Scholar.

34 One might suggest that Paul presupposes an underlying story, a story that he merely alludes to, but does not spell out completely, and that, if recovered, such a story might explain the tension. Cf. Hays's argument that the differences between 3.13–14 and 4.3–6 may be explained by assuming a more comprehensive underlying story (The Faith, 81–2, 108–9). However, it is difficult to see how such an argument could be made in this case. Gal 3.13–14 and 4.3–6 may be understood as making references to different parts of the same story; e.g., 3.13–14 mentions the cross and 4.3–6 the incarnation; 3.13–14 refers to Christ as the subject and 4.4–5 to God; 3.13–14 uses the title ‘Christ’ and 4.3–6 the title ‘[God's] Son’. The problem in 4.1–7, however, is not that Paul may omit something on one occasion and omit something else later; the problem is that he affirms two things that cannot both be true at the same time. An underlying story that could solve the tension inherent in Gal 4.1–7 would have to explain how Israel could be children and heirs on the one hand and slaves in need of redemption and adoption on the other. It is possible to imagine some ways in which Paul might have been able to resolve this tension (based on the assumption that the different descriptions referred to Israel at different times or to different constituencies within Israel), but it is not possible to appeal to any evidence in Galatians for any such resolution, not even the fact that Paul felt the need to provide one. It would be purely speculative to attempt to reconstruct a theology of Galatians on the basis of any such assumptions.

35 Martyn concludes: ‘Paul's interpretation of the seed to whom God made the covenantal promise is as polemically punctiliar as it is polemically singular’ (Galatians, 347). Hays maintains that ‘most of the history of Israel vanishes into an interpretive abyss’ and that there is no development that moves from Abraham to Christ. Instead, he finds that the Christ-event relates typologically to the story of Abraham (The Faith, 56–7). Cf. also Klein, G., ‘Individualgeschichte und Weltgeschichte bei Paulus: Eine Interpretation ihres Verhältnisses im Galaterbrief’, EvT 24 (1964) 148–51Google Scholar; Watson, F., ‘Is There a Story in These Texts?’, Narrative Dynamics (ed. Longenecker) 238Google Scholar; Barclay, ‘Paul’, 53–4.

36 This interpretation of the nature of the law is probably the reason why Paul can associate the circumcision commandment with the Mosaic law (5.3), even though this commandment was given by God to Abraham.

37 Dunn focuses on the sacrificial system as a remedy for sin and paraphrases: ‘in order to provide a way of dealing with, in order to provide some sort of remedy for transgressions’ (Galatians, 189-90). Bruce Longenecker argues that the function of the law is ‘to restrain sinful desires and to protect Israel from excessive sinful indulgence’ (Triumph, 122-8; similarly Lull, D. J., ‘“The Law Was our Pedagogue”: A Study in Galatians 3.19–25’, JBL 105 [1986] 483–5Google Scholar; Vouga, Galater, 82–3; Fee, G. D., Galatians: Pentecostal Commentary [Pentecostal Commentary Series; Blandford Forum, UK: Deo, 2007] 129–30Google Scholar). Hays favors a similar interpretation, in combination with the view that the law identifies sin (‘Galatians’, 266–7; cf. below).

38 Arichea, D. C. and Nida, E. A., A Translator's Handbook on Paul's Letter to the Galatians (Helps for Translators 18; Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1976) 74Google Scholar; Martyn, Galatians, 254; de Boer, Galatians, 230–1.

39 For the former interpretation, see Meyer, H. A. W., Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Epistle to the Galatians (trans. Venables, G. H.; Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1873) 170Google Scholar; Lightfoot, Galatians, 144; Burton, Galatians, 188; Lagrange, M.-J., Saint Paul épitre aux Galates (EBib; Paris: Gabalda, 3rd ed. 1926) 82Google Scholar; Schlier, Galater, 152-3; Bonnard, Galates, 72-3; Oepke, A., Der Brief des Paulus an die Galater (THKNT 9; Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 3rd ed. 1973) 115Google Scholar; Mussner, Galaterbrief, 245-6; Betz, Galatians, 165; Bruce, Galatians, 175; Barrett, Freedom and Obligation, 33; Eckstein, H.-J., Verheissung und Gesetz: Eine exegetische Untersuchung zu Galater 2,15–4,7 (WUNT 86; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996) 191–3Google Scholar; Martyn, Galatians, 354–5; Schreiner, T. R., Galatians (Zondervan Exegetical Commentary Series on the New Testament; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010) 239–40Google Scholar; de Boer, Galatians, 230–1. For the latter, see Longenecker, Galatians, 138; Matera, F. J., Galatians (SP; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1992) 128Google Scholar; cf. also Hays, ‘Galatians’, 266–7.

40 The meaning of συγκλείω is to ‘confine’ or ‘imprison’ (BDAG). Cf. Rom 11.32.

41 Lull, ‘“Pedagogue”’; Young, N. H., ‘Paidagogos: The Social Setting of a Pauline Metaphor’, NovT 29 (1987) 150–76Google Scholar.

42 A point missed by Georg Bertram (‘παιδεύω κτλ’, TDNT 5.620).

43 Schlier, Galater, 168–70; Oepke, Galater, 121–2; Betz, Galatians, 77; Belleville, L. L., ‘“Under Law”: Structural Analysis and the Pauline Concept of Law in Galatians 3.21–4.11’, JSNT 26 (1986) 60Google Scholar; Martyn, Galatians, 363; Sänger, D., ‘“Das Gesetz ist unser paidagogos geworden bis zu Christus” (Gal 3,24)’, Das Gesetz im frühen Judentum und im Neuen Testament: Festschrift für Christoph Burchard zum 75. Geburtstag (ed. Sänger, D. and Konradt, M.; NTOA/SUNT 57; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006) 254–60Google Scholar; de Boer, Galatians, 240–1; and, more cautiously, Young, ‘Paidagogos’, 170–3. James Dunn translates παιδαγωγός as ‘custodian’ and argues that the image is that of protective custody (Dunn, Galatians, 197–9; Theology of Paul's Letter to the Galatians, 89–90). This interpretation does not seem to do justice to the fact that Paul here describes a state from which liberation was necessary. In 4.3, he invokes the less ambiguous image of slavery.

44 Barrett likens its function to that of a jailor or an executioner (Freedom and Obligation, 35).

45 For the meaning ‘human faith in Christ’, see Meyer, Galatians, 200; Burton, Galatians, 198; Lagrange, Galates, 89; Schlier, Galater, 166; Bonnard, Galates, 75; Oepke, Galater, 120; Mussner, Galaterbrief, 254–5; Bruce, Galatians, 181; Fung, R. Y. K., The Epistle to the Galatians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988) 168Google Scholar; Dunn, Galatians, 197; Schreiner, Galatians, 245–6; for ‘the content of faith’, ‘the gospel’, ‘Christ’, or ‘Christ's faithfulness’, see Betz, Galatians, 176; Longenecker, Galatians, 145; Lührmann, Galatians, 74; Martyn, Galatians, 361–2; Witherington, Galatians, 268; Hays, ‘Galatians’, 269–70; for both subjective faith and objective teaching, see Lightfoot, Galatians, 148.

46 Hays sees this parallel as evidence that Paul in Gal 3.23 does not refer to subjective faith, but to ‘the faith which is believed’ or, as he prefers, ‘the faithfulness of Christ’. His argument is that ‘revelation is not a matter of human possibility’ (‘Galatians’, 269–70). However, subjective faith should not be understood as a human possibility, but as the result of divine intervention, as Paul explains in Gal 1.12, 16. Cf. Seifrid, M. A., ‘Faith of Christ’, The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies (ed. Bird, M. F. and Sprinkle, P. M.; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2010) 41Google Scholar.

47 Similarly, Lightfoot, Galatians, 148.

48 The prepositional phrase ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ probably does not modify τῆς πίστεως (contra CEB; CEV; KJV; NIV84; NLT) but rather υἱοὶ θεοῦ. The sense is captured well by the NRSV: ‘for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith’ (cf. ESV; GNB; NAB; NEB; NIV; NJB; REB).

49 Mussner, Galaterbrief, 262; Betz, Galatians, 861; Longenecker, Galatians, 521; Dunn, Galatians, 202; pace Schlier, Galater, 171-2. Even interpreters that find Christ's faithfulness to be the antecedent of ‘the faith’ in 3.23 agree that the ‘faith’ in 3.26 refers at least partly to human faith (Martyn, Galatians, 375; Hays, ‘Galatians’, 271), but see also de Boer, Galatians, 242.

50 Dunn, Galatians, 210.

51 Similarly, Wolter, M., ‘Das Israelproblem nach Gal 4,21–31 und Röm 9–11’, ZTK 107 (2010) 3, 15Google Scholar.

52 Pace Hansen, Abraham in Galatians, 132.

53 Similarly, Wakefield, Where to Live, 193–4.

54 Similarly, Kwon, Eschatology, 39–40.

55 The perfect tense refers not only to the objective fact of Christ's crucifixion, but also to the state that results from it (Dunn, Galatians, 413). Martyn emphasizes that the crucifixion is ‘an event that happened apart from [Paul]’, but concedes that ‘he participated in that event’ (Galatians, 563–4).