Loading...Galatians in a Nutshell
Paul’s letter to the Galatians is one of the most important and intriguing books of the New Testament, in parts not difficult to understand and in other parts densely packed with meaning, and therefore heavily disputed (check out Galatians 2:17-19 or 3:19-20 some time; if you think either is obvious, I can assure you your obvious interpretation is very much disputed!). It is only six chapters long, but there’s a lot in there. I had a friend in graduate school who wrote an entire dissertation to unpack just one verse (3:1).
How to summarize it in one sentence of 50 words? If you’re familiar with the book, give it a shot. Here’s one attempt at it:
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
Either the Gospels authors, or whoever told the authors about Jesus miracles, lied, or Jesus really did do those miracles. Is this true?
My gut says there’s no way those miracles really happened. But it just doesn’t strike me that whoever first told about Jesus miracles are liars. I just can’t fathom those people would be this immoral.
One might argue that people might have different views on what a miracle is back in the day. But healing different people with different diseases merely by touching, raising people from death, and feeding 5000 people with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish. These would be viewed as miracles at any time in history, wouldn’t it? Be it year 29 or year 2025.
Either they lied or it really happened. Right? I really don’t believe those miracles happened, but I also really don’t feel those people just straight-up lied.
Which one would you pick, Dr. Ehrman? And can you give a more convincing explanation on this? Thank you.
Someone who gives historically incorrect information is not necessarily lying. The vast majority of times they’re not. They’re just getting things wrong. And yes, if these things happned they would be considered miracles. But that doesn’t mean they happened. As you know, there are thousands of miracles reported by thousands of people that can be shown not to have happened. I bet you don’t think the miracles ascribed to the Baal Shem Tov, attested by eyewitnesses, happened!
Thank you for the reply Dr. Ehrman. If a sick person was simply touched by Jesus and was immediately healed, how can that person possibly get what happened wrong? And isn’t what happened simply a miracle? Can you delineate how a person could falsely tell such simple and straightforward event?
If one of the Gospels authors wrote down that event? He just recorded a miracle, didn’t he? Or, if he wrote down something different from the original event, then someone in the chain of information transmittal must have lied. Is it not true? Or, if a person overheard others’ conversations, or he heard rumors about the original event. Then he told a Gospel author about it. Wouldn’t that be lying? Since he didn’t “know” what happened, he just “thinks” that’s what happened and claimed it happened that way.
What would be another explanation of the information distortion of such simple and straightforward event, if someone didn’t lie? Thank you Dr. Ehrman.
I”m not quite sure what you’re asking. We don’t have any writing from someone that Jesus healed claiming this. And the Gospel writers were not eyewtinesses either (they lived in a different part of the world decades later). But no, a report of a miracle that didn’t happen is not necessarily a lie. In fact, usually it’s not. Rumors spread over night and rarely are they simply lies. There’s a whole field of research on rumors and gossip that you may be interestd in checking out — very intersting stuff.
Dr. Ehrman——-Have you read Craig Keener’s 2 volume work on contemporary miraculous healings with medical backup–MRIS, X-RAYS AND OTHER MEDICAL RECORDS
In that work, he provides DOZENS of examples of physical healings of people who were healed in answer to prayer. I would encourage you to at least skim through the second volume of Keener’s work
Also—what specific evidence would you need from physicists to show that the laws of nature could be temporarily and momentarily suspended to show that Jesus was physically raised from the dead? In your debate with Justin Bass–you said that you were open to what physicists had to say about the laws of nature and whether they are unchanging or not. Have a good day–KYLE
Yes. Craig is a smart guy, but his credibility for all things traditional is quite remarkable, up and down the line. He and I spoke at an apologetics conference some years ago and he insisted that he had “proof” that memory is deeply reliable: his 92-year old neighbor could clearly remember things that happened to her as a child. Sigh…
My name is Kyle and I wrote a book entitled “Jesus: God incarnate, Risen Lord” My friend sent you a copy of my book and I was wondering if you have received it and if you would be interested in discussing its contents, i hope we can have an ongoing dialogue on it. Thank you—-KYLE
Congrstulations on the book! I’m afriad I can’t read all the books I receive in the mail (I often get a couple a week). But I do hope it sells well and gets wide distribution.
Dear Bart!
There is one mistake in the letter to the Galatians: he uses names incorrectly. Genesis 15:6 is about Abram. Paul made a big mistake here!
Thanks Dr Ehrman. Clearly a fascinating Pauline Letter. As an aside, I think I read somewhere (can’t remember where) that an Irish monk travelled to Galatia (in the ?5th century) and was able to converse with some of the local people in the Celtic language. Galatia had originally been settled by Celts (Celtoi in Greek, Galli in Latin) and the Celtic language appears to have been more standardised then, than it is today.
Okay, I’m thinking, and I have a question regarding Galatians 3:16 compared to verse 29 and Genesis 12:7; 13:15;
24:7.
He says the scripture doesn’t say “seeds,” but “seed,” meaning one, and then in the 29th verse uses “seed” to mean many. This seems a bit dubious. When you look at the passages in Genesis (mentioned above), they seem to be talking about “descendants.” Do you think Paul is being honest here, or did he get away with something that seemed to convince the masses through the generations thereafter?
It seems to be an overlooked detail in what Paul was doing with the Jewish scriptures.
Thank you for all the hard work you do! I am more informed because of it. It is a beautiful thing to be behind the scenes of the Bible through your work and the work of many others.
I look forward to your thoughts on my question!
I think he’s being honest. He’s just using an accepted approach among Jewish scholars to iterpretation that makes a major issue of an interesting piece of wording. But I agree — it’s always seemed like a huge stretch to me too!
Thank you!
The reason I can’t believe that any Bible is “the word of God” is because written literature is such an inefficient, problematic way of passing along essential information. God, being omnipotent, could have simply downloaded his “word” directly to our brains, thereby giving every human being of the last 2000 years everything we need to know. (The argument that our brains can’t handle so much information is also specious, since an omnipotent God could make our brains capable of holding it.)
I agree with this. & if God truly wanted the devoted to understand what he was saying, then the truth would Bev clear without refute.
HOW long have I been knocking …
Does Paul’s “devaluation” or “de-emphasis of the Jewish Law include The Ten Commandments? If so, are some Christians today too wrapped up in The Ten Commandments by insisting on the Commandments being posted in public schools or other public places? Have they missed Paul’s point? Or is this my misunderstanding of what Paul was trying say?
‘
“
Paul wasn’t opposed to the Jewish law at all. He simply thought that anyone who thought keeping it was a key to being saved was barking up the wrong tree. He would have supported Nine of the commandments among his gentile converts — all but the need to keep the Sabbath. (Which, btw, Xns who want the laws in classrooms never seem to notice they don’t keep either!)
Would it be a reasonable interpretation of Galatians 2:6-10 that the Jerusalem apostles saw Paul going to the gentiles as a way of getting rid of him? The idea is that they did not agree with Paul’s gospel but had no interest in preaching to the gentiles anyway since they saw what Jesus did as only for the Jews. So if Paul wanted to waste his time talking to the gentiles let him do it. We are only getting Paul’s side of the dispute. The “right hand of fellowship” extended to Paul from the Jerusalem apostles may be just Paul’s self serving spin on the dispute.
Paul never indicates that, and we don’t have any other writngs that do So I’m not sure what would make it likely they were just trying to get rid of him. (I.e., it’s an interesting idea — but what makes it probable?)
I find it fascinating that a letter like Galatians survives at all. You gotta figure that when the Galatians received it, they wouldn’t have been very happy reading it and just tossed it out. Or maybe they were actually convinced by it and decided to send copies to other churches so that they wouldn’t fall into the same “error” as they had. Or maybe whoever delivered the letter from Paul made a copy. Or maybe Paul himself had copies made and sent to other churches so that they wouldn’t be “foolish” like the Galatians.
I know it’s mostly all just speculation, but what are some scenarios you imagine that would have led to this letter being copied and being spread wide enough to have survived?
Presumably *some* of them at least found it a powerful refutatoin of the views of others, and so kept the letter.
I’ll give it a shot.
Paul in the Instrumental Case. The Law is a means unto death, but Christ is a means unto life and God.
Gen.15:6
Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness.
Gen.22:1-17
God said, ”Abraham, offer your only son Issac as a burnt offering.”
Then Abraham took out his knife and prepared to sacrifice Issac.
But an angel stopped him saying, ”Now that I know you fear God, I will bless you.
Sorry Paul, Abraham did not have the courage to sacrifice himself rather than his son.
Not much of a role model in my opinion.
Salvation by ”Faith” in the teaching of Jesus
Mt.16:27-28
The Son of Man will come with his angels, in the glory of his Father, –and then he will reward each person ACCORDING TO WHAT THEY HAVE DONE.
Mt.19:16-19
What Commandments must I obey TO HAVE ETERNAL LIFE?
You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not bear false witness. You shall honor your father and mother. You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
Mt.25:31-46
The Son of Man will come in his glory with his angels. Then all the Nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people. To those at his right hand he will say: My Father has Blessed you, for when I was hungry –you gave me food. I was thirsty –you gave me drink. I was a stranger in need –you gave me clothing and shelter. I was sick –you cared for me. I was in prison –you came to visit me. Whatever you do for the least among you –you have done for me. NOW COME AND RECEIVE THE KINGDOM that was prepared for you –before the world was created.