Terry L. Johnson, Galatians: A Mentor Expository Commentary (Geanies House: Christian Focus Publications, 2012).

Johnsons commentary is traditional in the sense that it follows the biblical text pericope by pericope. He offers, in fact, 40 chapters of comments on the 40 pericopae he sees in the book of Galatians. He writes Though the sections are unequal, the forty chapters in this work, in the end, turn out to be almost equally divided. 1. Galatians 1:1-5:12. Twenty two theological chapters (with plenty of practical application). 2. Galatians 5:13-6:18. Eighteen practical chapters (with considerable theological content). (p. 9). Further, the book began as Sunday morning sermons (Ibid.) And the tone and tenor of the commentary is sermonesque (which is what good commentaries, commentaries that are aimed at the instruction and edification of the faithful should be). Since this is the case, the explication of the text of Galatians is festooned with pastoral remarks and practical direction for modern application. This is not, then, a critical commentary. Scholars pursuing the nuts and bolts of the letter to the Galatians (text critical issues, historical issues per se, etc.) will find no help here. And that is, it seems to me, in accordance with the authors purpose. What readers will find, though, is sensible, forthright, and accurate and reliable exposition. For example, in his treatment of Gal 5:12, Johnson writes The word rendered mutilate in the NASV is translated emasculate in the NIV, and literally means to castrate. Zerwick renders the whole, noting that the particle would that (ophelon) introduces a wish not likely to be realized. This was a dreadful thing to wish, notes Morris, but then the teaching was a dreadful thing to inflict on young Christians. Castration was a form of service to the deity among pagan priests, and would have been known by the Galatians. The Apostle Paul is putting their insistence upon circumcision on the same level with that sort of despicable paganism which seeks acceptance with its god on the basis of self-mutilation (p. 149). Thats a fair interpretation to be sure. And Johnson gets to the point without belaboring it. Compare, for instance, the explanation of Martin Luther (a man not afraid of verbosity):

St. Jerome thinks that the apostle is cursing here but is going to a great deal of trouble to excuse or at least to extenuate it. But since we have learned from what was said earlier that saints are wont to curse and formerly were also wont to do so, and since Christ also cursed the fig tree (Matt. 21:19)or if it seems too trifling a matter that a fig tree is cursed, Elisha certainly cursed human beings, namely, the children of Bethel, in the name of the Lord (2 Kings 2:24); and in 1 Cor. 5:5 Paul delivered the fornicator over to Satan and says in the last chapter of that same epistle (1 Cor. 16:22): If anyone has no love for the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema, , which Burgensis says is the worst kind of curse among the Hebrews, whereas our scholars understand as the Lord is coming, though mistakenly, in my opiniontherefore it is not at all strange if Paul is cursing here too, calling down evil upon the outward man, through whom, as he saw, the good of the spirit was being hindered. Jerome takes that they would mutilate themselves as referring to the private parts of the body. For he has in mind those who are castrated, which is so great a misfortune that if it has been inflicted on men against their will, punishment is demanded by the laws of the state; and if it is done voluntarily, disgrace is incurred. In Deut. 23:1 we read: He whose testicles are crushed or whose male member is cut off shall not enter the assembly of the Lord. And in Deut. 25:1112 it is commanded that without any mercy they are to cut off the hand of a woman who, when men are fighting, takes hold of the other mans private parts in order to rescue her husband. Would these not be foolish and ridiculous things even if they were written in the books of heathen? Indeed, so they would be if God did not gladly make the wisdom of the world foolishness. It was not His wish that in things so shamefulthough they are shameful by our own faultour pride should feel disgust at secrets so great. The two testicles are certainly the two testaments, for a scribe who is learned in the kingdom of heaven will bring forth from his treasure things new and old (Matt. 13:52). Does not the womans womb signify the will and the conscience? But I pass over these things, because those who are pure will discover them for themselves, while those who are impure do not hear such matters without peril. However, the womans hand that must be cut off because she took hold of the private parts of a strange man would seem to me to be the foolhardiness of those who, in a contest between a true teacher and a false one, set aside or even twist the Scriptures and try to win by means of their own understanding and by means of human opinions. But what does this mean? It means that when Paul, who was thoroughly instructed in the Law, deals with circumcision and the teachers of circumcision, he seems to wish for them that they not only be circumcised, but that they be completely mutilated, not only with respect to the foreskin

but with respect to the testicles and the male member as well. He is evidently alluding to the hidden meaning which the Greek text also indicates by adding the connective also, as follows: Would that they would also multilate themselves! That is to say: If they really want to be circumcised, I wish they would also mutilate themselves and be eunuchs, whose testicles and male members are severed, that is, who are unable to teach and to beget spiritual children, and who should be thrown out of the church. For a bishop, yes, Christ, is the husband of the church, which He makes fruitful with the seed of the Word of God through His testicles and male member in complete chastity and holiness. The members of the ungodly, however, should be cut off, because they plant a foreign seed and an adulterous word.1 While Luther is right, he says too much. Theres something important about making the point and moving on. And Johnson makes the point and moves on. These days brevity really is the soul of wit (and exegesis). But that doesnt mean that Johnson rushes through the text! Indeed not. He takes his time and patiently explains without ever condescending or pandering. The volume concludes with the endnotes and indices. I wish it didnt. I despise endnotes. I prefer footnotes simply because if I wish to check a reference I dont want to have to thumb to the end of the book to do so. Its cumbersome and annoying and theres no reason that notes cant or shouldnt be at the bottom of the page on which they occur. No reason at all. Johnsons volume is very much, though, worth reading and consulting; particularly by those wishing to consult a reliable guide to a fascinating biblical book. Jim West Quartz Hill School of Theology

Luther, M. (1999). Luther's works, vol. 27: Lectures on Galatians, 1535, Chapters 5-6; 1519, Chapters 16 (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.) (Ga 5:12). Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.