Introduction

Survey of the Problem

There are many learning theories or models competing for prominence among educators these days. Depending on the educator's view of man and the learning process a different model is constructed. However, one would expect that these models would reach some kind of a consensus, but as Thompson says, these "learning theories . . . expose different and sometimes conflicting, explanations of behavior" (p. 9, [italics mine]).

As a Christian, I can appreciate the research being done by educators. This is not an easy task. But, on the other hand, I feel there are some major points of disagreement between the presuppositions and conclusions of the secular educator and those of the Scripture.

Purpose of the Paper

The purpose of this paper is to two-fold: 1) to define various models of learning behavior within the Psychological school of thought; 2) to interact with these models on the basis of an evangelical bibliology.¹

Method of the Paper

In order to interact with these 'learning theories' from a bibliological grid, the paper will first define an evangelical bibliology, including the major categories and presuppositions. Then the learning theories will be defined and interacted with on the level of presuppositions, methods and conclusions.

An Evangelical Bibliology

Statement of the Doctrine of Bibliology

The following section gives a brief statement that exposes the heart of an evangelical bibliology, as well as the major categories for consideration in an evangelical bibliology.

The Essence of an Evangelical Bibliology²

In 1978, the International Conference on Biblical Inerrancy made the following statement as regards bibliology:

Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all it's teaching, no less in what it states about God's acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about it's own literary origins under God, than in it's witness to God's saving grace in individual lives.³

This statement reflects a synthesis of the following categories or areas of thought usually considered under bibliology

Major Categories in Bibliology

The following is a brief review of the essential categories of bibliology, necessary for interacting with learning theories.⁴

Revelation

Revelation is the process whereby God made His thoughts known in or to the mind of a person (e.g. a prophet, apostle, etc.).

Inspiration

The term inspiration refers to the original manuscripts of the scripture as "breathed out by God." They are therefore, ultimately a divine product, though they bear the personalities, styles, etc. of the human author.

Inerrancy

As a result of the superintending process of inspiration, the scriptures are free from error in all that they affirm or teach.

Canonicity

Canonicity is the process whereby the church, using certain criteria, determined which books were inspired of God (and therefore authoritative for faith and life) and which were not.

Composition

There are no original manuscripts of scripture remaining today. Composition refers to the process of textual criticism in order to determine the precise wording of the extant manuscripts.

Illumination

Illumination is the process whereby God quickens or enlightens a persons mind to receive, understand and obey the truth of scripture.

Interpretation

Interpretation is the process of investigating God's word, using sound principles, in order to arrive at a consistent understanding of the Scripture.

All of the above categories presuppose certain truths which will now be discussed. We will see that it is at the level of presuppositions where the greatest conflict occurs with secular learning theories.

Major Presuppositions in an Evangelical Bibliology

The following section is a brief statement concerning the essential presuppositions involved in defining bibliology from a scriptural perspective. The fact that God is, that He speaks, that there is therefore a final or terminal reality and that man has a problem will be considered here.

God Is and He Has Spoken

Our bibliology, as discussed and defined above, presupposes the existence of a personal, communicative God. We cannot have revelation, etc. if God does not exist. In line with the truth that He exists is the fact that He has not been silent, but has indeed made Himself known in creation and more specifically in a collection of writings over many years (i.e. the Bible). Hundreds of times in scripture we read, "Thus says the Lord..." or it's equivalent (~3800x).

A Final Authority

Our bibliology presupposes the fact that there is no reality outside of God and that there is such a thing as absolute truth (i.e. truth not dependant upon anything except God). That is, nothing lies beyond Him or is greater than He is. Therefore, whatever He has said in the Scripture is binding and final in it's authority. It may not speak directly to every issue, but it is reasonable to conclude that every issue known to man is touched by the scripture or can be approached from a scriptural world-view.

An Inherent Problem in Man

The fact that man needs a revelation from God concerning first truths (i.e. that God is Creator, Sustainer and Redeemer) precludes some problem within man, in that He is not able to apprehend and value the obvious. Our bibliology presupposes something about the inability of man to know both God and himself.

The Bottom Line of Bibliology

The essential question that our doctrine of bibliology dogmatically answers is the question of authority . The Bible recognizes the validity of research into various fields of inquiry (i.e. learning theories), but reserves the right to pass ultimate judgment as to the interpretation and meaning of the data gathered. Therefore, since we are saying that the Bible is the final authority, we are also saying by implication that final authority lies outside of man, that it is trans-generational and trans-cultural.

Let us turn now to an analysis of Psychological school of learning theory (and it's sub-categories) using an evangelical bibliology.

Psychological Learning Theories
Analyzed in the Light of an Evangelical Bibliology

The purpose of this section is to define and interact (using our bibliology) with three schools of thought within Psychological Learning Theory. First, we will consider the Behaviorist school of thought, then the Neo-behaviorist and finally the Cognitivist school.

Behaviorism and an Evangelical Bibliology

First we will define behaviorism, then interact with it at the level of presuppositions, methods and conclusions.

Brief Definition

Behaviorism is the study of man from a purely stimulus/response scenario, with no attention given to internal matters (i.e. mind or heart of the learner). It focuses on external, observable realities, arriving at conclusions about learning theory from this data. The writings of B. F. Skinner endorse this view.

Major Presuppositions & Their Relation to Bibliology

The first presupposition in Skinner's model (or any behavioral model) is that man has a problem of some sort. It is at this point that we agree. Every learning theory seems to me to be an attempt to understand man and curb his behavior in some way--try to make him better in some way. Thus they assume man to have some internal problem whereby he cannot perform as he should. As we mentioned in our presuppositions of an evangelical bibliology we also believe man has a problem, for the giving of scripture precludes this fact. Scripture, of course, gives us an authority for understanding the problem.⁵

The second premise in the behaviorist approach to learning is that there is no need for God. All one needs to do is observe the actions or behavior of an individual and one can understand that individual. Granted, some information can be gathered and an understanding of certain behavior patterns realized, but to try and build an entire theory of how man learns, apart from God, is contrary to an evangelical bibliology which presupposes that God is and therefore He must be addressed.

The third presupposition overlaps with the second. Our bibliology states that God is and has spoken in a book. Therefore, that book must be consulted. Skinner's learning theory, by the way it is conducted (without reference to or acknowledgement of Scripture) denies this and is therefore going to be less than adequate as a learning theory model. His theory would not allow for the Scriptures the paramount place they deserve.

The final presupposition has to do with authority. Again the behaviorist model implicitly teaches that the locus for authority in the development of a learning theory is man himself (i.e. the researcher). There is no need to consult an outside authority, i.e. the Scripture. Our bibliology will not accept this. Scripture is the final judge of truth.

Neo-Behaviorism and an Evangelical Bibliology

The purpose of this section is to briefly define Neo-behaviorism and then interact with it on the level of presuppositions, methods and conclusions.

Brief Definition

Neo-behaviorism is basically the same as Behaviorism except that it gives some weight to issues in the heart/mind of the learner. It seeks, not only to understand the stimulus/response pattern, but also to understand the mediating factors between the stimulus and response.

Major Presuppositions & Their Relation to Bibliology

This theory denies the need for God and His revelation and therefore, the locus of authority is again in man himself. Man can speak authoritatively and definitively without God. Our bibliology will not permit this premise to stand as true. It is false.

Having stated the problems with their presuppositions, there are nonetheless some interesting points of similarity between some of the methods of learning and the Scripture as Divine revelation.

D. O. Hebb sees the need for adult learners to "capitalize on previous experiences to teach new tasks." Our bibliology validates this truth in as much as the Bible is a recording of previous experiences so that people might learn how to handle new learning situations (cf. the frequent references to what God has done in the past as a basis for learning and action in the present). Thus the scripture itself uses this method.

Bandura also emphasizes the need for models and observational learning. This is precisely why God incorporated so many models into the scripture and on one level even Christ functioned in this way (cf. Jn. 13:15).

Cognitivism and an Evangelical Bibliology

The purpose of this section is to define and interact with Cognitivism on the level of presuppositions, methods and conclusions.

Brief Definition

Cognitivism is the theory of learning that believes that man is essentially a rule former, developing a-posteriori categories as he experiences life, using what he has developed to make decisions in life.

Major Presuppositions & Their Relation to Bibliology

This theory, as a Psychological learning theory, operating out of a similar world view to Behaviorism and Neo-behaviorism, denies the need for God and His revelation. Therefore, the locus of authority is in man himself. Man can speak authoritatively and definitively without God. Again we would say that this is definitely untrue.

However, we may again see areas of similarity at the method level between the Scriptures and Cognitivism. The Scriptures as revelation, contain huge portions of material directed primarily (or at least firstly) at the mind (cf. Romans 1-11; Eph. 1-3; primarily didactic and aimed at the mind). Since we comprehend God primarily at the idea level, the scriptures stress concepts and ideas about Him. These ideas and concepts are revealed in an organized fashion. This is similar to Ausubel and his ideas of an expository approach to learning in order to inculcate cognitive structure in the mind of the learner. But, this method does fall short of Scriptural revelation in that the Scriptures reveal God in more ways than just through concepts or cognitive structure.

Cognitivism, as espoused by Bruner, places emphasis upon discovery learning. Our bibliology assumes discovery learning to be important. God took the time to write His thoughts down and He invites people to read His revelation and learn from it individually (as well as corporately).⁶

Conclusion

The psychological theories of learning addressed above ultimately undermine and stand opposed to an evangelical bibliology. They deny that God is, that He has spoken and that authority rests in His word, not in man.

This being true though, there are certain points of similarity between some of the methods arising from psychological learning theories and some of the methods as found in Scripture.

1 Note: Systematic theology (of which bibliology is a part) is a unified whole--hopefully. Therefore, it is difficult to talk about one area of theology without bringing in the other areas (i.e. Trinitarianism, Christology, etc.) at various points along the way. I have consciously tried not to move into anthropology and hamartiology in this paper. Obviously they contribute significantly to a critique of these learning theories, but my paper will try to deal with the issues from a bibliological perspective.

2 It goes without saying that there are so called evangelicals who hold positions slightly and even substantially different than what is presented, but I feel that this represents where most evangelicals are.

3 Norman L. Geisler ed., Inerrancy (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1980), p.494.

4 This material comes from the following sources: Paul Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology (Chicago: Moody Press, 1989), pp.153-176. Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology Abr.Ed. ed. John F. Walvoord & others. (Wheaton, Illinois: Victor Books, 1988), 1:47-108.

5 Here, we could go into sin, etc. but it only needs to mentioned that our bibliology assumes some problem in man (or else why do we need the scripture) as does their learning theory.

6 Again, it must be stated that these theories are woefully erroneous and inadequate from a biblical anthropological point of view, but this was not the point of this paper. The point of this paper is to look at them through the lense of an evangelical bibliology.

I. Primary Material

The following article is composed of possible parallels between the New Testament and the Mystery religions.¹ The purpose for the paper is simply to demonstrate that the mystery religions help at times to elucidate background (i.e. practices, beliefs and linguistic phenomena) for the understanding of certain N. T. texts.

A. Homeric Hymn to Demeter 216 and John 3:16

In the Homeric Hymn to Demeter 216 the text reads: "But we humans endure the gifts of the gods, even under grievous compulsion (cf. 256, 57), for a yoke lies upon our neck." This passage speaks of the oppression of the capricious gods over mortals to the point where any gift from the gods is basically endured by humans.

Both John and Paul proclaim a God who is quite distinct from these gods. God, according to John, so loved the world that he gave his only Son so that we might not perish but have eternal life. Paul rejoices in God's gracious gifts and is overwhelmed by the generosity of his Lord: "Thanks be to God for his indescribable gift" (2 Cor. 9:15 NIV).

B. Homeric Hymn to Demeter 275-80 and Matthew 17:1-13

According to the passage in the Hymn to Demeter, the goddess Demeter undergoes a "transfiguration," if you will, that parallels in some ways the transfiguration undergone by Christ. Demeter altered "form. . . and the radiance from the skin of the immortal goddess shone afar. . . and the sturdy house was filled with light like a flash of lightening." According to Matthew Christ's face shone like the sun and his clothes became as white as the light.

There are some differences, though, between the two accounts. There is no indication by Matthew of a "pleasant smell" or that Jesus changed "size." Perhaps even more important is the response of the disciples and that of the women in Demeter's mystery. The disciples respond with fear and so do the women, but the fear of the women was a fear of being capriciously destroyed, but that of the disciples seems to be mixed more with reverence. The result is that the women stayed awake all night long, "quaking with fear, propitiat[ing] the glorious gods." The disciples, however, were encouraged by the Lord to not be afraid.

C. Alexander the False Prophet and Paul's Ministry

The apostle Paul faced many struggles in his ministry. One of those struggles involved other men going about trying to undercut his ministry in some way (cf. 2 Cor. 10-12; 1 Thes. 2:3-5). Many of these men were no doubt of Jewish background, but some were Greek. The reason I have included this example of Alexander, the false prophet² is because it might afford us an illustration of the kind of Gentile false teachers Paul encountered. This man was a "fraud who used bogus religion to deceive the gullible and obtain for himself wealth and sexual pleasure." Perhaps Paul refers to this kind of person in 2 Timothy 3:6 and it seems likely that this is the kind of person who would have easily discredited the itinerant ministry of someone like Paul.

D. Rule of the Andanian Mysteries 3 and 1 Corinthians 11

The Rule of the Andanian Mysteries 3 is a rule-book for worship in the Andanian mysteries. One of the "rules" included the wearing of white felt caps by the women. Paul also required women at Corinth to wear a covering on the their head during worship. There is a possible parallel here that further study may illuminate, but it is safe to say that Paul's focus on creation theology as the rationale for the attire, is absent from the Rule of the Andanian Mysteries.

E. The Bacchae 73-82 and Matthew 5:3-11

The Bacchae 73-82 uses the term "blessd" in ways similar to Matthew in his Sermon on the Mount. Nine times in the mystery text the phrase "blessd are. . . " appears. Likewise, nine times in Matthew's gospel the phrase "blessed are. . . " appears. The mystery text, however, uses the term "blessd" twice (i.e. "blessd, blessd") in the first sentence and twice in the last sentence, almost like bookends.

Both texts are examples of the blessing of religious adherents, but the Matthean focus is more on blessing as a result of certain internal, personal character qualities, rather than external things as found in the Bacchae. Another difference appears to be the relation of each of the blessings to the others. The blessings in the mystery text seem to be distinct from each other (i.e. relatively speaking) while the blessings described in the Sermon on the Mount seem to be related to each other sequentially.

F. The Bacchae 100-104 and Galatians 4:4

The Bacchae 100-104 says that "when the weaving Fates fulfilled the time, the bull-horned god was born of Zeus." The linking up of the birth of a deity (i.e. the son of Zeus) with the fulfillment of time has a parallel in the thoughts of Paul. In Galatians 4:4 the apostle says that when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law to redeem those under the law. . . ." Thus the parallel consists in the idea of the deity coming according to a certain point in time. The differences include the fact that: 1) Christ came according to the plan of a wise, loving and sovereign God, the son of Zeus came according to Fate and 2) the Son came to redeem fallen humanity.

This raises the larger issue of the kinds of gods found in the mysteries and the God of the New Testament. The gods of the mysteries are incredibly human in nature and possess all that is most disturbing about us in our fallen state. They are petty at times, intoxicated with lust and greedy for power and control. At the same time they are dreadfully inadequate and severely limited in authority.³ Apparently they were attractive because of their immanence, not their transcendence per se. The God of the New Testament, while described anthropomorphically at times, is not sinful as the New Testament understands it. He is holy, just and merciful, and his control of all things is contingent upon nothing but his sovereign will guided by pure love. Therefore, the end result is that the world-view⁴ of the "mystery-believer," is substantially different from that of the apostles.

G. The Bacchae 470 and Colossians 1:23

It is common in the mystery religions for the adherents or initiates to be prohibited from telling others (i.e. outsiders or the "non-initiated") the secret "mysteries." Not so with the New Testament. As far as Paul was concerned, God wanted everyone to know about his secret—Christ. Paul says that his gospel had been preached to every creature under heaven and that God had chosen among the hitherto uninitiated (i.e. non-Jews)to make known the glorious riches of the mystery, namely, "Christ in you." It is admitted that the saints knew the mystery better than those outside, but, nonetheless, all without exception can hear the mystery.

II. Secondary Material

The following material consists of comments pertaining to articles by Karl P. Donfried⁵ and Bruce M. Metzger⁶ as well as interaction with Marvin W. Meyer's work, The Mystery Religions: A Sourcebook.⁷

A. The Movement toward Personal Religion (Meyer)

According to Meyer one of the reasons why the "mystery religions" flourished during the Hellenistic period and on into the first few centuries in the Christian era, was due to the waning influence of the polis and the concomitant decline in the sufficiency of the Olympian pantheon to satisfy the worshipper.⁸

There appears to have been a movement away from the external focus of the city-state deities to the personal, internal focus offered by the many mysteries. The one was removed and distant, the other near and immediate. It is interesting that as the Greeks were turning, though not monolithically for sure, to personalized religion, God sent his son—in the fullness of time, as Paul says (Gal, 4:4). Perhaps God was setting the stage in the Greek world for the coming of his personal revelation in Christ. (It appears that some of the later "mysteries" borrowed from Christianity in terms of the personal closeness of the former's God to the worshipper.)

For the sake of discussion there appears to be a contemporary lesson for us here as well. The city-state religions because they were external and legislated could never satisfy. This is a simple lesson but the movement of people toward something internal (more emotional/experiential) and away from something external (more on the factual/non-emotive level) happens all the time and the mystery cults afford us yet another example to the end that if we as Christians are not offering the "spirit and truth," people will eventually reject our message as bankrupt. In our circles we tend to emphasize objective truth more than the experience of that truth. Perhaps it is fair to say that we often offer the truth separated from its relational context; i.e. with God and people. Both are necessary, however, for meaningful life and religion. So, we need to offer people the truth as well as a deep experience of God, lest they invent their own "mysteries." This, of course, presupposes that we have both.

B. "Beholding" in the Eleusinian Mysteries and 1 John 1:1-4; 3:2, 3 (Meyer)

According to Meyer, the highest stage of initiation in the Eleusinian mysteries is that of epopteia, 'beholding,' and an initiate into the real mysteries was called an epoptes, "beholder." 1 John 1:1-3 says

1:1 ’O h ajp ajrch'", o} ajkhkovamen, o} eJwravkamen toi'" ojfqalmoi'" hJmw'n, o} ejqeasavmeqa kai aiJ cei're" hJmw'n ejyhlavfhsan, peri tou' lovgou th'" zwh'" 1:2 kai hJ zwh ejfanerwvqh, kai eJwravkamen kai marturou'men kai ajpaggevllomen uJmi'n thn zwhn thn aijwvnion h{ti" h pro" ton patevra kai ejfanerwvqh hJmi'n 1:3 o} eJwravkamen kai ajkhkovamen ajpaggevllomen kai uJmi'n, i{na kai uJmei'" koinwnivan e[chte meq hJmw'n. kai hJ koinwniva de hJ hJmetevra meta tou' patro" kai meta tou' uiJou' aujtou' Ihsou' Cristou'.

John places a heavy emphasis on "seeing" or "beholding" Christ, most likely in response to some form of gnosticism (e.g. docetism),⁹ but this emphasis on beholding seems to parallel the idea of beholding in the Eleusinian mysteries as well. Note the exclusivity (common among the mystery religions) in the statement: o}. . . ajkhkovamen ajpaggevllomen kai; uJmi'n, i{na kai uJmei'" koinwnivan e[chte meq hJmw'n. On the other hand, there is obviously a lot of material here that is not congruent with the mystery religions; including the unique focus on the person of Christ and fellowship with Christ and His father (v. 4). The idea of "seeing" Christ is brought out again in conjunction with His return in 3:2, 3.

C. Enlightenment and Ephesians 1:18 (Meyer)

Meyer says that the Eleusinian mysteries offered "enlightenment" to those initiated (cf. Miscellanies [Stromateis] 3. 3. 17). Paul also talks about spiritual "enlightenment" that leads to knowledge of several things including knowledge of God and His power (Eph. 1:18). Perhaps the best way to view this is that both are drawing from a common base of religious vocabulary current at that time. In other words the whole concept of "enlightenment" was used to express religious conviction and insight in the first century.

D. The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence (Donfried)

F. F. Bruce, while dealing with the various options, understands the term skeu'o" in 1 Thessalonians 4:4 to refer to the male sex organ, but bases his interpretation primarily on the LXX reading of 1 Samuel 21:5.¹⁰ Donfried understands the term to mean the same, but bases his interpretation on the affinities between 1 Thessalonians and the mystery religion background of the city.¹¹ Given the strength of these parallels between Paul's letter and the citations from the mystery religions in the city of Thessalonica, I tend to think that Donfried's argument is stronger for it deals with the text in its immediate historical context first. All Bruce is doing is opening the way for skeu'o" to refer to male genitalia by indicating that it has such a use in the LXX.

In general I think that Donfried proceeds on safe ground in his comparisons of the mystery religions with the letters to the Thessalonians. Certainly his work provides, as he indicates, some of the general background to texts such as 1 Thes. 1:10 and 4:5.

E. Methodology in the Study of the Mystery Religions and Early Christianity (Metzger)

There has always been, it seems, a struggle for scholars to be judicial in their approach to the relation of extra-biblical materials to the Bible, whether it's materials pertaining to O. T. backgrounds or N. T. backgrounds. Either they tend to define the message and meaning of the Scripture by its historical context or they disavow any influence of the culture upon the sacred writers.¹² Perhaps there is a better, truer path.

The "better" path according to Metzger leads us to a more critical, thoughtful approach. I think that he's right and that these materials should be handled in a historical-critical fashion. Dr. Metzger gives 6 criteria for comparing the materials, but perhaps the most significant include the following three: 1) there is relatively little evidence concerning the actual content of the mysteries themselves; 2) there appears to be significant, though often overlooked differences, between the Palestinian church and the Greek people groups involved in the mysteries and 3) the differences between the materials must be allowed to speak as well as the similarities. This last point is crucial because it is the defining idea when the final statement is made about the relation the N. T. has to the mysteries and vice-versa.

F. Summary

There are parallels between the mystery texts and the N. T. In some cases knowledge of the mysteries helps us greatly in our understanding of the background to a N. T. passage¹³ and at times it helps for understanding N. T. vocabulary better.¹⁴ There are also practices that seemed to parallel the N.T.¹⁵ And the one great event of the N. T., the resurrection, appears to have its counterpart in the mysteries.¹⁶

We must remember, though, that there are many differences in these parallels as well, and that the essential world-view of the mystery writers is not the same as that of the apostles. This accounts for the use of similar religious language and forms but investing them with new meaning in the light of Christ. In the final analysis, all alleged parallels must be treated cautiously and substantiated on the basis of clear affinities established through critical study.¹⁷

1 It needs to be said at the outset that in order to ascertain with a reasonable degree of certainty that a parallel does exist, one would need to conduct a more serious study (historical-critical) of both texts (i.e. N. T. text and Mystery text) as they were originally given. Then, one is in a better position to carry out comparisons. So this study must be seen as general and each supposed parallel would need to be further investigated for dating, etc.

2 This individual is late with respect to the N. T. (i.e. 2nd century C. E.), but probably was similar to the kinds of people Paul faced in the mystery religions of his day.

3 This appears to be the case in all the mysteries, including the Eleusinian, etc.

4 A world view is a thought-paradigm for putting together and making sense out of one's reality. For theists it includes the great questions of: 1) who is God? 2) who is man? 3) what is the problem? 4) what is the solution? These questions are answered in radically different ways by the mystery adherents than by Christians.

5 Karl P. Donfried, "The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence," NTS 31 (1985): 336-56.

6 Bruce Metzger, "Methodology in the Study of the Mystery Religions and Early Christianity," in Historical and Literary Studies: Pagan, Jewish, and Christian (Leiden, 1968), 1-24.

7 Marvin W. Meyer, ed., The Ancient Mysteries: A Sourcebook, Sacred Texts of the Mystery Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean World (SanFranciso: HarperCollins Publishers, 1987).

8 Meyer, The Ancient Mysteries, 1-4.

9 Guthrie, NTI, 864-866.

10 F. F. Bruce, 1, 2 Thessalonians, Word Biblical Commentary, 83.

11 K. P. Donfried, "The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence," NTS 31 (1985): 341, 42.

12 Consider the evolution of the debate surrounding the use of extant Biblical materials to shed light on O.T. texts. My understanding at this point is that scholars can, at times, jump on band-wagons, all the time feeling like they're critically evaluating parallels. Perhaps closer attention should be paid to why they're answering the questions the way they do. Cf. Cyrus H. Gordon, "Biblical Customs and the Nuzu Tablets," The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, vol. 2, ed. D. N. Freedman and E. F. Campbell (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1957), 21-33. T. J. Meek, "Mesopotamian Legal Documents," Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, ed. James B. Pritchard (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1955), 219-220. George E. Mendehall, "Mari," The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, vol. 2, ed. D. N. Freedman and E. F. Campbell (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1957), 3-20. H. H. Rowley, "Recent Discovery and the Patriarchal Age," BJRL 32(1949): 44-79. M. J. Selman, "Comparative Customs and the Patriarchal Age," Essays on the Patriarchal Narratives, ed. A. R. Millard and D. J. Wiseman. (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1983), 91-139.

13 Cf. Acts 17 and the mention of Zeus, Hermes, etc.

14 For example, cf. 1 Thes. 5:5-7 (and the concept of darkness and evil) with The Bacchae 485. There also appears to be affinities between the term musthvrion as found in the N.T. and in the mystery religions.

15 Cf. the drinking and feasting as part of the mystery religious rites and the Lord's Supper; Livy, History of Rome 39.8; Luke 22:15-20 and 1 Cor. 11:17-33.

16 The whole issue of the "dying and rising of the mystery gods" is taken up by Metzger, Methodology, 18, 19. I do not believe that the

17 This is the whole intent of Metzger's article on Methodology in studying the relationship of the mystery texts to Christianity.

Introduction

Paul’s letter to the Romans is probably the most systematic presentation of the gospel in all of his writings, and indeed in all of the NT. The letter can be broken down into two major sections, namely, doctrine (1:18-11:36) and then application (12:1-15:13). This large body of material is bracketed by an introduction (1:1-17) and a postscript (15:14-16:27). The point of this brief paper is to provide some thoughts on the verses that make up the introduction, 1:1-17.

A Translation of 1:1-7 (The NET Bible)

1:1 From Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God 1:2 that he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, 1:3 concerning his Son who was a descendant of David with respect to the flesh, 1:4 who was appointed the Son-of-God-in-power according to the Holy Spirit by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord. 1:5 Through him we received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles on behalf of his name. 1:6 You also are among them, called to belong to Jesus Christ. 1:7 To all those loved by God in Rome, called to be saints: Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ!

Comments on 1:1-7

1 From Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God (Pau`lo" dou`lo" Cristou` jIhsou` klhtoV" ajpovstolo" ajfwrismevno" eij" eujaggevlion qeou`)

Paul begins his magnificent letter with the longest of his salutations. In 1:1-7 he tells them who he is (1:1), gives them the heart of the gospel (1:2-4), the nature of his mission and ministry (1:5) and addresses the audience he has presumably never met (1:6-7).

In this first verse Paul sets out for his readers three important facts; 1) his master; 2) his office; and 3) his purpose.¹ First, Paul considered himself a slave (dou`lo") of Christ Jesus. While it was unthinkable to a cultured Greek that a relationship with a deity would involve the concept of slavery, it was not at all uncommon for a Jew. Undoubtedly the background for the use of the expression “a servant of…” is to be found in the Jewish Old Testament scriptures so that it does not connote drudgery, but honor and privilege. It was used of Israel in general at times (Isa 43:10), but was especially associated with famous OT personalities including such great men as Moses (Joshua 14:7), David (Ps 89:3; cf. 2 Sam 7:5, 8) and Elijah (2 Kings 10:10): all these men were servants of the Lord. Though there is indeed much honor in the use of the expression, for it was an extreme privilege to serve YHWH, it was not Paul’s desire in this context to simply place himself among venerated OT saints, or express his gratitude to be a servant of Christ Jesus (though both are true), but rather to communicate in plain terms his commitment and devotion to the Messiah Jesus. Though there are several reasons for his allegiance to Christ, it is ultimately due to his recognition of who Jesus is. Paul’s insertion of “Christ Jesus” into the OT formula “a servant of YHWH” shows the high view of Jesus that he maintained. He considered Jesus worthy of the same obedience and devotion as YHWH.

Second, Paul was called to be an apostle (ajpovstolo"). With the use of the term apostle, Paul moves from his allegiance to Christ to his authority to speak on Christ’s behalf. It was God who called him in history to become his spokesperson for the gospel. While the term ‘apostle’ is used with a general force in the New Testament to designate someone who is sent (cf. Phil 2:25; 2 Cor 8:3), it is also used by Paul to speak of someone who is specially gifted to communicate revelation from God and to whom the churches were responsible (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 3:5).² Thus the apostolic gift was foundational to the development of the church (Eph 2:20; 4:11). This latter meaning is the sense Paul intends here. He is about to communicate revelation from God and the Roman church needs to know that as a servant of Christ, and one called as an apostle, he has the authority to do so.

Third, while Paul was keenly aware of his allegiance to Christ and conscious of his foundational role in the church as an apostle, he also knew that the particular expression of his servanthood and apostleship was by means of being set apart (ajfwrismevno") by God for the ministry of the gospel (eujaggevlion) to Gentiles (cf. Gal 1:15-17; 2:8). Being ‘set apart’ has in it the idea of consecration and total devotion to the service of God. It was used of the offering of the first-fruits (Num 15:20) and God setting apart Israel as His special possession (Lev 20:26). It may carry the sense of Jeremiah 1:5 here (cf. Gal 1:15), that is, set apart before birth, but more than likely since it follows called it refers to Paul’s dedication to the gospel at the time of his call to apostleship.³ The gospel refers to God’s saving activity in Christ and comes from the Hebrew term rvb (bashar) in the OT.⁴ It means to proclaim good news, especially of victory (e.g., 1 Sam 31:9). But, as Cranfield points out, it was also used in Greek culture to refer to the birth of an heir to the emperor, or his coming of age and accession to the throne.⁵ But, while that may have been good news to some people, Paul says that God’s good news is the gospel about his Son who we find out later in Romans is the true sovereign and savior of men (cf. 10:9-10).

2 that he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, (o} proephggeivlato diaV tw`n profhtw`n aujtou` ejn grafai`" aJgivai")

The mention of promised beforehand in the holy scriptures (proephggeivlato grafai`" aJgivai") indicates that Paul views the gospel about Christ as naturally arising out of the OT and supported by it. We will see his use of OT scripture in chapter 4 to demonstrate just such a truth and that the proper interpretation and fulfillment of OT hope is in Christ. This will be critical in his discussion of the Law throughout Romans and the place of Israel in God’s plan of salvation.

3 concerning his Son who was a descendant of David with respect to the flesh, (periV tou` uiJou` aujtou` tou` genomevnou ejk spevrmato" Dauivd kataV savrka,)

Having already stated that the gospel was promised beforehand in the OT, Paul now moves on to further define it. Notice that Jesus was God's son (tou` uiJou aujtou`) before his resurrection from the dead. The mention of David (Dauivd) links Jesus with all that was promised to David in 2 Samuel 7:8-16, Ps 72, 89, etc. and asserts his true and enduring manhood (i.e., humanity).

4 who was appointed the Son-of-God-in-power according to the Holy Spirit by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord. (tou` oJrisqevnto" uiJou` qeou` ejn dunavmei kataV pneu`ma aJgiwsuvnh" ejx ajnastavsew" nekrw`n, jIhsou` Cristou` tou` kurivou hJmw`n,)

The translation of the Greek expression tou` oJrisqevnto" is difficult to nail down. It seems best in this context, since the “Son” is already the “Son” before his resurrection (v. 2), that “declared” or “appointed” is best. Perhaps, with Davidic kingly image behind it, “installed” would work as well, thus drawing on the regal coronation idea of Israel’s Davidic kings. It seems most likely, then, that what we have here is not a change in Jesus’ essence, but in his function in redemptive history. He is now functioning as the reigning Davidic king as a result of his resurrection (cf. the sonship language in 2 Sam 7:14-15). The early church regarded him as fulfilling this function (Acts 2:36; 13:33-35). The reference to the Holy Spirit is literally “spirit of holiness” (pneu`ma aJgiwsuvnh"). This is an uncharacteristic phrase (Semitic) for Paul and probably denotes, not Jesus’ personal holiness as a man, but rather the Holy Spirit. The use of this expression along with other un-Pauline markers in the text may suggest that Paul is drawing on church tradition with which his readers may have been familiar. It must be pointed out, however, that this is in no way certain and is not an attempt to minimize Paul as a creative author in his own right.

5 Through him we received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles on behalf of his name. (di ou| ejlavbomen cavrin kaiV ajpostolhVn eij" uJpakohVn pivstew" ejn pa`sin toi`" e[qnesin uJpeVr tou` ojnovmato" aujtou`,)

The nature of the grace (cavrin) to which Paul refers here is linked closely with apostleship (ajpostolhVn) and must be viewed as that enablement which works itself out in the context of one’s divine calling and vocation. The direction of Paul’s apostolic efforts is to win obedience to the gospel which comes about by faith—and this he hopes to achieve among all the Gentiles. Here we have one of the many universalistic statements of Paul concerning the scope of the offer of salvation in Christ (cf. e.g., 1:16). Though Jesus came as the fulfillment of OT promise he is not for the Jew only, but indeed for the Gentiles as well. His name is that of YHWH (10:9-10) and he is Lord over the entire world.

6 You also are among them, called to belong to Jesus Christ. (ejn oi|" ejste kaiV uJmei<" klhtoiV jIhsou< Cristou<,)

The reference among whom you also shows that a good number, if not the majority, of the Christians in Rome were Gentiles. Further, Paul says that these Gentile Christians are called to belong to Jesus Christ. For Christians, all of reality is wrapped up in a relationship—a personal relationship with their Lord to whom they gladly belong. He has bought them with a price (1 Cor 6:19-20) and they are secure in him (Rom 8:38-39).

7 To all those loved by God in Rome, called to be saints: Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ! (pa<sin toi<" ousin ejn JRwvmh/ ajgaphtoi<" qeou<, klhtoi<" aJgivoi", cavri" uJmi`n kaiV eijrhvnh ajpoV qeou< patroV" hJmi`n kaiV kurivou jIhsou< Cristouv.)

Paul says that these Christians are loved by God and called to be saints. The reference to them being saints is in accord with their attachment to Christ, through faith, and not as a result of their deeds. Though their calling will affect their lives, here the focus in on their status before God; they are holy in his sight. Paul ends his rather lengthy salutation with a commendation of grace and peace, the former being the efficient cause of the latter.

Summary of the Passage

In his salutation Paul wants his readers to know that he is a slave of Christ in the spirit of important OT personalities, and that he is an apostle with authority and set apart to the ministry of the gospel. The gospel he preaches has its antecedents in the OT and is about God’s son who was of regal descent and was declared the Son of God in power by the Holy Spirit in consequence of his resurrection from the dead. On the basis of Christ’s Lordship Paul had received grace and apostleship to win the Gentiles to obedience to Christ. Those in Rome constituted part of the field assigned to the apostle’s ministry.

Application from the Passage

1.

2.

3.

A Translation of 1:8-15 (The NET Bible)

1:8 First of all, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed throughout the whole world. 1:9 For God, whom I serve in my spirit in the gospel of his Son, is my witness that I continuously remember you 1:10 and I always ask in my prayers, if perhaps now at last I may succeed in visiting you in the will of God. 1:11 For I long to see you, so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you, 1:12 that is, that we may be mutually comforted by one another’s faith, both yours and mine. 1:13 I do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, that I often intended to come to you (and was prevented until now), so that I may have some fruit among you too just as I have among the rest of the Gentiles also. 1:14 I am a debtor both to the Greeks and to the barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish. 1:15 So I am eager to preach the gospel to you who are in Rome also.

Comments on 1:8-15

1:8 First of all, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed throughout the whole world. (Prw`ton meVn eujcaristw` tw`/ qew`/ mou diaV jIhsou` Cristou` periV pavntwn uJmw`n o{ti hJ pivsti" uJmw`n kataggevlletai ejn o{lw/ tw`/ kovsmw/).

In the next section, vv. 8-15, Paul wants to tell his readers how he longs to visit them in order that both they and he will benefit from each other’s faith. The faith of the Roman christians had become known probably throughout Asia minor and all the way back to Palestine and Jerusalem. Indeed, the fact that people had bowed the knee to Christ in the capital city was significant for the cause of Christ around the world. For this Paul was extremely thankful to God.

1:9 For God, whom I serve in my spirit in the gospel of his Son, is my witness that I continuously remember you (mavrtu" gavr mouv ejstin oJ qeov", w|/ latreuvw ejn tw`/ pneuvmati mou ejn tw`/ eujaggelivw/ tou` uiJou` aujtou`, wJ" ajdialeivptw" mneivan uJmw`n poiou`mai)

It was common for the apostle to assert his constancy in prayer for other christians, both for those whom he had ministered to as well as those he had not (1 Cor 1:4; Eph 1:16; Phil 1:4; Col 1:3; 1 Thes 1:2; 2 Thes 1:3 Phlmn 3). The term serve (latreuvw) connotes the idea of worship and is so used in the Greek OT (LXX) to refer to Israel’s commitment to worship YHWH (Ex 20:5; Deut 5:9) and in her desire to leave Egyptian captivity and worship/serve God in the desert (Ex 7:16). Thus Paul’s service in the gospel of God, in that he preaches it to others and prays unceasingly for them, is really his deep expression (cf. in my spirit) of worship to God. There may even be a priestly idea in the use of the expression in my spirit (see 15:16), but this may going a bit too far.

1:10 and I always ask in my prayers, if perhaps now at last I may succeed in visiting you in the will of God. (pavntote ejpiV tw`n proseucw`n mou deovmeno" ei[ pw" h[dh poteV eujodwqhvsomai ejn tw`/ qelhvmati tou` qeou` ejlqei`n proV" uJma`".)

It was Paul’s strong desire to be able to visit the church in Rome, and not just to use it as a base of operations for the Spanish mission (cf. 15:24), but to contribute to the church (1:11). In any case, he was not entirely certain that God would grant the request.

1:11 For I long to see you, so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you, (ejpipoqw` gaVr ijdei`n uJma`", i{na ti metadw` cavrisma uJmi`n pneumatikoVn eij" toV sthricqh`nai uJma`",)

It is reading too much into Paul’s use of spiritual gift here to take it as a special manifestation of the Spirit such as we see in 1 Cor 12-14. It is perhaps better to regard the gift as more general and a reference to some specific service he can render when he gets to Rome and learns more about the needs of the church there. In fact, whatever the gift is, it will lead to their strengthening. Would that all christians would have this mindset. To seek to strengthen others by contributing to their spiritual needs is truly a sign of a deep relationship with Christ. Not only did Paul preach the gospel, and defend it, he also lived it.

1:12 that is, that we may be mutually comforted by one another’s faith, both yours and mine. (tou`to dev ejstin sumparaklhqh`nai ejn uJmi`n diaV th`" ejn ajllhvloi" pivstew" uJmw`n te kaiV ejmou.)

Paul hopes that not only will he be able to contribute to them, but that both he and they may be comforted by each other’s faith. The fact that he refers to faith here is further evidence that what he means by gift in the previous verse is not that he will give the Roman church spiritual gifts, but that through the exercise of the gifts already given the apostle and the Roman church by God, each will be edified, the one by the other.

1:13 I do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, that I often intended to come to you (and was prevented until now), so that I may have some fruit among you too just as I have among the rest of the Gentiles also. (ouj qevlw deV uJma`" ajgnoei`n, ajdelfoiv, o{ti pollavki" proeqevmhn ejlqei`n proV" uJma`", kaiV ejkwluvqhn a[cri tou` deu`ro, i{na tinaV karpoVn scw` kaiV ejn uJmi`n kaqwV" kaiV ejn toi`" loipoi`" e[qnesin).

Paul had often tried to come to the Romans but was unable. He says the same thing in 15:22 where the pressing need to establish new churches and promulgate the gospel in other areas hindered him from coming. Thus we may assume that this is what he means here in 1:13. Paul maintained a tremendous zeal for the gospel to go to the Gentiles and that he have some fruit among them referring probably to both new converts as well as spiritual growth among the christians.

1:14 I am a debtor both to the Greeks and to the barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish. ({Ellhsin te kaiV barbavroi", sofoi`" te kaiV ajnohvtoi" ojfeilevth" eijmiv,)

The fact that Paul knew he had been set apart for the gospel of God (1:1) led to his deep conviction that given such a privilege he was now in debt to all men, that is, to preach the gospel to them. It is clear that Paul means all men (probably only implicitly referring to the Jews at this point) by the description he gives, but there is disagreement on the precise referent for each term. Scholars have put forth many suggestions, some better than others, but the most reasonable seems to be that the first pair refers to cultured Greeks as well as Barbarians, that is, those who were not Greeks. Thus we have here a reference to all of Gentile humanity. The second pair, the wise and the foolish, could be a further explanation of the first pair or simply a cross section of Gentile humanity including those who thought they had achieved some intellectual status and those who obviously had not (cf. 1 Cor 1:19, 20, 26-27).

1:15 So I am eager to preach the gospel to you who are in Rome also. (ou{tw" to; kat ejmeV provqumon kaiV uJmi`n toi`" ejn JRwvmh/ eujaggelivsasqai)

Paul’s desire to preach the gospel in Rome is as a consequence (ou{tw") of his general feelings of debt for all men.

Summary of the Passage

The reason Paul prays for the Roman christians and is striving to come and see them is so that he can strengthen them in their faith (and he too receive comfort) for he feels that he is indebted to all men.

Application from the Passage

1.

2.

3.

A Translation of 1:16-17 (The NET Bible)

1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is God’s power for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 1:17 For the righteousness of God is revealed in the gospel from faith to faith, just as it is written, “the righteous by faith will live.”

Comments on 1:16-17

1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is God’s power for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. (Ouj gaVr ejpaiscuvnomai toV eujaggevlion, duvnami" gaVr qeou` ejstin eij" swthrivan pantiV tw`/ pisteuvonti, jIoudaivw/ te prw`ton kaiV {Ellhni.)

Paul was certainly not ashamed of the gospel for as he saw it, it was the power of God to save men, both Jew and Gentile alike. He will explain how it not only saves from the penalty of sin, but also from its power and ultimately from its very presence. It has the power to bring anyone into a right relationship with God through Christ at the moment they believe in God’s saving action in Christ. The reference to the Jew first and also to the Greek is not merely temporal such that the Jews were the first to hear the good news, but also one of priority for the promises of salvation through God’s messiah were first given to the Jew (cf. e.g., 2 Sam 7:8-16). This theme will be developed at length in Romans 9-11.

1:17 For the righteousness of God is revealed in the gospel from faith to faith, just as it is written, “the righteous by faith will live.” (dikaiosuvnh gaVr qeou` ejn aujtw`/ ajpokaluvptetai ejk pivstew" eij" pivstin, kaqwV" gevgraptai: oJ deV divkaio" ejk pivstew" zhvsetai.)

The word for takes us back to the preceding idea in v. 16 about the gospel being the power of God for salvation. How is that so? Paul knows that the gospel saves because it reveals the righteousness of God. We may understand the expression righteousness of God in a broad sense referring both to God’s saving activity and the resultant status of those who have been saved; they are now in a right relationship with him. It is not simply a reference to his character, though all that he does in saving men and women flows from his righteous character. The reference to from faith to faith has been variously interpreted throughout the history of the church: 1) it refers to the faith of the OT saints to the faith of NT saints; 2) from an immature faith to a more mature one; 3) from a Law-oriented faith to a gospel-oriented faith; 4) from the faith of the preacher to the faith of the hearers; 5) from present faith to a future faith; 6) from God’s faithfulness to man’s faith, etc. All these have some truth in them, but fail to deal adequately with the connection of this statement with the following quotation from Habakkuk. The point of Habakkuk’s comment in the OT is that it is only by sheer faith that one can ever comprehend the seemingly difficult things God does and this is probably the sense here in Romans 1:17. There is a parallel in 2 Cor 2:16. There Paul refers to “from death to death” which is intended to be rhetorical and refer to death, period. Thus we may say that, by the phrase from faith to faith, Paul is simply arguing that it is by faith and faith alone that one receives this righteous status and understands God’s work of saving sinners. This doctrine, Paul says, is anticipated in the Old Testament as (kaqwV") the quotation from Habbakuk 2:4 argues. There are several complexities involved in understanding the precise meaning of Paul’s citation of Hab 2:4 (and we cannot go into them here), but its function is to substantiate the claim that the gospel is appropriated only by faith. It is enough to say that by faith is probably to be taken with the righteous rather than will live as we have translated it. (But cf. the Greek OT and the Hebrew text which take by faith with will live). Thus the point Paul is making is that the person who is righteous by faith, will live. Paul uses this text in a way somewhat different than it is understood in the OT. The reader is urged to compare the two.

Summary of the Passage

The reason that Paul was not ashamed of the gospel is because it has the power to deal with the problem of sin and provide a person with a right standing with God—a feat impossible for people on their own.

Application from the Passage

1.

2.

Select Bibliography

Barrett, C. K. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Harper’s New Testament Commentaries. Edited by Henry Chadwick. New York/Evanston/London: Harper & Row, 1957.

Cranfield, G. E. B. The Epistle to the Romans. The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. Edited by J. A. Emerton and C. E. B. Cranfield. 2 Volumes. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1975, 79.

Dunn, James D. G. Romans. Word Biblical Commentary. Edited by Ralph P. Martin. Vols. 38A/B. Dallas, TX: Word Books, Publisher, 1988.

Edwards, James R. Romans. New International Biblical Commentary. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1992.

Harrison, Everett F. “Romans.” In The Expositor's Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein. Vol. 10. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976.

Moo, Douglas. Romans 1-8. The Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary. Edited by Kenneth Barker. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Murray, John. The Epistle to the Romans. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Two Volumes in One. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959, 65.

1 Moo, Romans, 1:34.

2 The meaning of “apostle” is probably derived more from the OT idea than from classical Greek. As Cranfield, Romans, 1:52, points out, it has to do with “an authorized agent or representative.”

3 So Murray, Romans, 3.

4 Moo, Romans, 37.

5 Cranfield, Romans, 55.

Commentaries

Aquinas, Thomas. Commentary on Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. Trans F.R. Larcher. Aquinas Scripture Series 1. Albany: Magi, 1966.

Betz, Hans Dieter. Galatians: A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Churches in Galatia. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979.

Boice, James Montgomery. Galatians. (EEC) Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.

Bruce, F.F. The Epistle to the Galatians. (NIGTC) Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.

Burton, Ernest De Witt. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians. ICC Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1999 (1921).

Calvin, John. “Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul to the Galatians and Ephesians.” In Calvin’s Commentaries. Vol. XXI. Trans. William Pringle. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981.

Cole, R. Alan. Galatians. Rev.Ed. (TNTC) Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989.

Cousar, Charles B. Galatians: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. Interpretation Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1982.

Dunn, James D.G. The Epistle to the Galatians. (BNTC) Peabody: Hendrickson, 1993.

Edwards, Mark J. Ed. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1999.

Fung, Ronald Y.K. The Epistle to the Galatians. (NICNT) Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

George, Timothy F. Galatians. (NAC) Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1994.

Guthrie, Donald. Galatians. (NCBC) Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973.

Hansen, G. Walter Galatians. (IVPNTC) Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1994.

Jervis, L. Ann Galatians. (NIBC) Peabody: Hendrickson, 1999.

Lightfoot, Joseph Barber. The Epistle of Saint Paul to the Galatians: With Introductions, Notes and Dissertations. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1957. (1865).

Longenecker, Richard N. Galatians. (WBC) Waco: Word Books, 1990.

Lührmann, Dieter. Galatians: A Continental Commentary. Trans. fr. Der Brief an die Galater 2^nd ed. 1988 by O.C. Dean, Jr. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992.

Luther, Martin. Lectures on Galatians. Vols. 26-27 of Luther’s Works. Ed. Jaroslav Pelikan and Walter A. Hansen. St. Loius: Concordia, 1963-64.

MacArthur, John F. Galatians. (MacArthur NTC) Moody Press, 1987.

Martyn, J. Louis. Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. (AB) Toronto: Doubleday, 1997.

Matera, Frank J. Galatians. (SP) Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1992.

McKnight, Scott. Galatians. (NIVAC) Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.

Morris, Leon. Galatians: Paul’s Charter of Christian Freedom. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996.

Ramsay, William Mitchell. A Historical Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979. (1900)

Ridderbos, Herman N. The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia. (NICNT) Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953.

Tenney, Merrill C. Galatians: The Charter of Christian Liberty. Rev. Ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957.

Williams, Sam K. Galatians. (ANTC) Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1997.

Witherington III, Ben. Grace in Galatia. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.

Studies on Galatians

Barclay, John M.G. Obeying the Truth : A Study of Paul's Ethics in Galatians. (Studies of the New Testament and Its World) Ed. John Riches. Edinburgh: T&T Clark Ltd, 1988.

Barrett, C.K. Freedom and Obligation: A Study of the Epistle to the Galatians. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985.

Bassler, Jouette M. Ed. Pauline Theology Volume I: Thessalonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon. Fortress Press, 1991.

Brinsmead, Bernard H. Galatians – Dialogical Response to Opponents. (SBLDS 65) Chico: Scholars Press, 1982.

Cosgrove, Charles H. The Cross and the Spirit: A Study in the Argument and Theology of

Galatians. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1988.

Dunn, James D.G. The Theology of Paul's Letter to the Galatians. Cambridge: The University Press, 1993.

Esler, Philip Francis. Galatians. (New Testament Readings) New York: Routledge, 1998.

Hansen, G. Walter. Abraham in Galatians: Epistolary & Rhetorical Contexts. (JSNTSS 29) Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989.

Hays, Richard B. The Faith of Jesus Christ: An Investigation of the Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1- 4:11. (SBLDS 56) Chico: Scholars Press, 1983.

Howard, George. Paul: Crisis in Galatia: A Study in Early Christian Theology. (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 35). New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979.

In-Gyu, Hong. The Law in Galatians. (JSNTS 81) Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993.

Jervis, L. Ann and P. Richardson. Gospel in Paul: Studies on Corinthians Galatians & Romans for Richard N. Longenecker. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996.

Kern, Philip H. Rhetoric and Galatians: Assessing an Approach to Paul's Epistle. (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 101) Cambridge: University Press, 1999.

Longenecker, Bruce W. The Triumph of Abraham’s God: The Transformation of Identity in Galatians. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998.

Martyn, J. Louis. Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1997.

Russell III, Walter Bo. The Flesh/Spirit Conflict in Galatians. Lanham: University Press of America, 1997.

Silva, Moiss. Explorations in Exegetical Method: Galatians as a Test Case. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1997.

Smiles, Vincent M. The Gospel and the Law in Galatia: Paul’s Response to Jewish-Christian

Separatism and the Threat of Galatian Apostasy. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1998.

Thielman, Frank. From Plight to Solution: A Jewish Framework to Understanding Paul's View of the Law in Galatians and Romans. (Supplements to Novum Testamentum, Vol 6). New York: E.J. Brill, 1989.

Journal Articles and Essays

Barclay, John M.G. “Mirror-Reading a Polemical Letter: Galatians as a Test Case.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament. 31 (1987): 73-93.

Bruce, F.F. “‘Called to Freedom’: A Study in Galatians.” In The New Testament Age: Essays in Honor of Bo Reicke.Vol. 1. Ed. William C. Weinrich. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1984. 61-72.

Matera, Frank J. “Galatians in Perspective: Cutting a New Path through Old Territory.” Interpretation. 54:3 (2000): 233-245.

Wright, N.T. “Gospel and Theology in Galatians.” In Gospel in Paul: Studies on Corinthians, Galatians and Romans for Richard N. Longenecker. Ed. L. Ann Jervis and Peter Richardson. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994. 222-239.

¹ As contributed by a user of http://www.bible.org, Tom Reynolds.