It is maintained that Gal. 4:13 is
hard to harmonize with the account of Acts 13 and 14. Against this contention,
two considerations are in order. First, that of all Paul’s experiences such
as he sums up in 2 Cor. 11:24 ff., only a few are reported by Luke in the Acts.
Hence any silence on Luke’s part about an illness which Paul had en route to
South Galatia can hardly be taken as evidence that Gal. 4:13 is in conflict
with the South Galatian theory.
Second, it is not necessary to hold that the “infirmity
of the flesh” spoken of in Gal. 4:13 was necessarily an illness. As we see it,
that infirmity may have been the physical suffering and exhaustion which accrued
to Paul en route in the form of molestation at Antioch (Acts 13:50), and of
stoning at Lystra (14:19). That last stoning was so severe that it was thought
Paul had died as a consequence. Moreover, Acts 14:20 speaks of the loving care
which the believers tendered Paul; and the same situation seems to have
obtained at Derbe to which he escaped. Hence, all the conjectures about the
significance of Paul’s “illness” are probably superfluous and Gal. 4:13 can
best be explained in correspondence with the known facts of Acts 13 and 14. If
this be true, the “infirmity of the flesh” is not an argument against but much
more probably an argument for the South Galatian hypothesis.
(b) In the churches to which this letter
is addressed, so it is argued, there were practically no Jews at all (5:2;
6:12). On the other hand, however, there were Jews in the churches at Antioch,
Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe; at Iconium there were quite a few (Acts 14:1), and
perhaps also at Antioch (Acts 13:43). Concerning that, this must be said first
of all: that it is hard to tell whether the number of Jews who at first
believed, even though at some places what was a considerable number, could
maintain themselves after what the enemies did to counteract Paul’s work in
those very places (cf. Acts 13:45, 46; 14:2, 4). And next, this can be
said: even though in this letter the readers are, in the main, thought of as
Gentile-Christians, this need nowhere be taken so absolutely as to exclude the
presence of a number of Jewish-Christians . . .
We conclude: a positive decision is
not possible in this matter. The choice is not a simple one, especially because
the authorities on the historical and archaeological particulars sometimes
express differing opinions. As we see it, the evidence, on the basis of which
the case must be made out, points to South rather than to North Galatia. Our
letter is to be regarded, then, as a pastoral missive sent by Paul to the
churches whose establishment is described for us in Acts 13 and 14—churches which
Paul visited again after their founding (Acts 16). These churches were among
the first that he formed. It is no wonder that in a special sense they retained
his love and care, as these are revealed in the letter. That they were
especially vulnerable to the Jewish danger, and therefore were easily affected
by Judaizing influences, is evident from the account of their establishment,
and has already been explained above. Further, everything points to a very cordial
relationship between the apostle and the churches (cf. 4:12 ff). (Herman
N. Ridderbos, The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia: The English
Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes [trans. Henry Zylstra; Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1953], 29-31)
