 |  |
CHRONOLOGY
ACTS
EPISTLES
85
OF
AND
(2) The South Galatia view.
The North Galatia view maintains that only that part of the map which was originally Galatia is the Galatia of the
Scriptures. It recognizes that it is somewhat awkward to have to acknowledge that of all the cities of North Galatia,
which the apostle is supposed to have visited, and where he is supposed to have founded the churches, and to which
he addressed his epistle, Tavium, Ancrya, Pessinus, not one is even mentioned in the Acts.
The South Galatia view maintains that by Galatia is intended the Galatia of the day, the large Roman Province
which had embraced Lycaonia and part of Phrygia on the south. According to this view, every city is named, and
Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe are seen as the churches of Galatia.
The North Galatia view necessitates that the epistle to the Galatians was written after Acts 18:23, for Galatians
4:13 indicates a second visit. This associates `Galatians' with `Corinthians'. The South Galatia view sees no
necessity for a later date.
While Acts 16:6 is looked upon by the North Galatia view as the first mention and founding of the church of
Galatia, giving no names or incidents of the journey, the South Galatia view looks upon Acts 16:6 as a re-visiting of
the churches already founded in Acts 13 and 14; and the brief summary is most fitting and understandable. Full
details had already been given in Acts 13 to 15.
Before passing on in our study, we will give historic proofs that Iconium, Lystra, Derbe and Antioch are rightly
addressed as `Galatia':
(1) Asterius, Bishop of Amaseia in Pontus, A.D. 401, in dealing with Acts 18:23 explains it in direct
contradiction of what was true in his own day. Lycaonia was not included in Galatia in A.D. 401.
`No conceivable interpretation could get Lycaonia out of Galatiken choran except deliberate adhesion to the
South Galatian view'.
(2) Dr. Schurer retracted his criticism of Prof. Ramsay's position after consulting Pliny and Ptolemy. Ptolemy
arranged his chapters according to the Roman Proconsular divisions:
v.
1.
Pontou kai Bithunias Thesis.
v.
2.
Tes idias Asias Thesis.
v.
3.
Lukias Thesis.
v.
4.
Galatias Thesis.
He states that Galatia is bounded on the South by Pamphylia, and on the north by the Euxine Sea, including in it
Pisidia in the south, and Paphlagonia in the north. He enumerates parts of which it consisted, and mentions Antioch,
Iconium, and Lystra as cities of Galatia.
So far as the date of the epistle is concerned, it has been assigned by different critics to the close, and to every
intermediate stage, of its author's epistolary activity. Marcion places `Galatians' first. Accepting as we do the
teaching that Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe are the churches of Galatia, the necessity for placing the writing of
the epistle to a period subsequent to Acts 18:23 is entirely removed. Both Ramsay and Weber believe that
`Galatians' was written from Antioch. Ramsay views Acts 13 and Acts 16 as the two visits; Weber considers that
the outward and homeward journeys of 13 and 14 suffice.
It is strange that Paul makes no reference to the `Decrees' in Galatians, and this silence is taken as an indication
that the epistle was written before Acts 15. Further, it has been said, the Judaizers could hardly `compel'
circumcision (6:12), after the decision at Jerusalem (Acts 15). Peter's action in Galatians 2 is also much more
difficult to understand if after Acts 15. Altogether, everything is favourable to an early date for the epistle, and we
believe we shall not be wrong in placing it first in chronological order.
Since writing this chapter, the author has come across a small book (The Date of Galatians, by Douglas Round),
dealing with the date of the epistle, in which the writer, while accepting the South Galatian view of Prof. Ramsay,
does not accept the date suggested by him, but argues very strongly for the position which we have felt to be the true
one, namely, the earliest of all the epistles. We quote his own opening words: