PHD - Galatians and Social Identity Theory PDF

Galatians and Social Identity Theory
by
David Paul Shaules
Claremont Graduate University

2011
Copyright David Paul Shaules, 2011
All rights reserved.
UMI Number: 3449362
All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI 3449362
Copyright 2011 by ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346
APPROVAL OF THE REVIEW COMMITTEE

This dissertation has been duly read, reviewed, and critiqued by the Committee listed
below, which hereby approves the manuscript of David Paul Shaules as fulfilling the
scope and quality requirements for meriting the degree of Ph. D in New Testament
Studies.
Dennis R. MacDonald, Chair
Professor of Religion
Gregory J. Riley
Professor of Religion
Michael Hogg
Professor of Social Psychology
Abstract
Galatians and Social Identity Theory
By
David Paul Shaules
Claremont Graduate University: 2011
This work applies social identity theory to Galatians in order to better understand
Pauls use of rhetoric and his manipulation of the communitys social boundaries. Social
identity theory stems from social psychology and studies the function of social identities
and the groups they create. It examines how social identities are created through
categorization and depersonalization and how this gives rise to complex group based
phenomena (i.e. self-enhancement, uncertainty reduction, group bias, group norms,
prototypes, the metacontrast principle, referent informational influence, superordinate
identities, depersonalized social attraction, leadership, etc.). This work uses social
identity theory to view the situation in Galatia as an intra-group conflict, between
individuals who believe they are all part of the same group. From this starting point, it
looks at social scientific criticism of the Bible, Jewish revolts and political turmoil,
rhetoric, the law, faith, the promise, Abraham, Christian identity, Pauls Jewish heritage
and his sufferings (in Galatians, Philippians, and 2 Corinthians), and Pauls leadership. In
examining the historical context, social identity theory suggests that uncertainty
concerning Jerusalem may have exacerbated the problem in Galatia, which was cause by
mixed table fellowship. It also highlights the social psychological impact that Pauls
argument had on its audience. By manipulating key group prototypes (i.e. the law,
Abraham), Paul is able to shift the groups boundaries, allowing for the admission of the
Gentiles. Furthermore, it underscores how Gal 3:26-29 reflects a superordinate identity,

which includes both Jews and Gentiles. Finally, it explains how Pauls accounts of his
Jewish heritage and suffering make him more prototypical, and thus makes him a more
effective leader.
Dedicated to:
My Wife, who supported me unconditionally, was
always there, and always listened. Who
never let me forget that she was by my
side.
&
My Father, who showed me the way and never let
me forget what I was capable of.
vi
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my committee members: Prof. Dennis R. MacDonald for his
patience and encouragement; Prof. Gregory J. Riley for his enthusiasm; and Prof.
Michael Hogg for working with me across department lines. I would also like to thank
my family: My Wife and my Dad for supporting me without measure; my Mom for
always reassuring me that everything will work out; my Brother for keeping me sane with
his constant support and friendship; my Grandmother Church for her unending
confidence and love; and my Uncle Vince who was always interested in my work and
always pushed me to succeed. Id also like to thank all of my friends who both tolerated
me and helped me refine my research. Particularly, Id like to thank Dan, who was
always there to challenge me and help me refine my ideas, and also Chris, who continued
to take an active interest in my work despite being thousands of miles away. Finally, I
would like to thank Claremont Graduate University and the School of Religion for
providing me with a once in a lifetime opportunity to study and grow.
vii
Table of Contents
Introduction
Chapter 1: Social Identity Theoretical Model
Origins and Development
Social Identity
11
Groups
15
Prototypes, Categorization, and Entitativity
16
Social Categorization and Depersonalization
18
Accessibility and Fit
20
Social Identity Motivations
21
The Influence of Groups
22
Chapter 2: Specific Features of Social Identity Theory
27
Uncertainty-Identity Theory
27
Superordinate Identity
31
Depersonalized Social Attraction
35
Social Identity Theory of Leadership
38
Chapter 3: Social Identity and Modern Religion
44
Categorization
45
In-group Bias
48
Group Norms and Behavior
51
viii
Metacontrast Principle
54
Threatened Identity
55
Self-Enhancement
57
Uncertainty Reduction
60
Superordinate Identities
62
Identity Definition
63
Conclusion
65
Chapter 4: Social Scientific Criticism
69
History
70
Methodological Assumption
77
SITs Applicability to the New Testament
82
Social Scientific Criticism and SIT
84
Chapter 5: Historical and Social Context
92
Maccabean Revolt
94
Quiriniuss Census
96
The First Jewish-Roman War
98
The Bar Kokhba Revolt
100
The Overall Relationship with Rome
103
The Revolts in Light of the Social Identity Theory
103
Authorship
107
Destination
107
ix
Date
109
Mixed Table Fellowship
112
The Incident at Antioch
115
The Situation in Galatia
117
Chapter 6 Rhetoric 122
Chapter 7: Prototypical Behavior
134
Galatians 2:15-21
138
Galatians 3:1-9
144
Galatians 3:10-14
147
Galatians 3:15-18
149
Galatians 3:19-26
150
Galatians 4:1-7
153
Pauls Final Position
155
Chapter 8: Prototypical Figures
158
Abraham
159
Galatians 3:6-9
163
Galatians 3:13-14
167
Galatians 3:15-16
169
Galatians 3:17-18
173
Galatians 3:29
174
x
Galatians 4:21-23
176
Galatians 4:24-26
177
Galatians 4:28-31
179
Chapter 9: Superordinate Identities
181
Galatians 3:26-29
192
Chapter 10: Prototypical Leaders
201
Leadership and Jewish Prototypes in Galatians

Galatians 1:13-14
202
202
Leadership and Jewish Prototypes in Philippians
204
Leadership and the Christ Prototype in Galatia
207
Leadership and the Christ Prototype in Philippians
212
Leadership and the Christ Prototype in 2 Corinthians
216
Summary
219
Conclusion
221
Bibliography
224
1
Introduction
Scholarship, across all academic fields, has made progress over the last fifty
years. If the last fifty years are any indication, the growth of academic knowledge in this
area is exponential. Building upon the research of their predecessors, and aided by
technological tools and advances, scholars make new discovers more quickly than ever.
For better or worse, this process has lead to an increased level of specialization. Even
within a single field, scholars often bring their expertise to bear on a small portion of the
field. A literary scholar might specialize in one author, a religion scholar in one sect, a
social scientist in one model. This situation has created a fertile opportunity for
transdiciplinary dialogue, in which different areas of scholarship inform one another in a
mutually beneficial exchange.
This is the spirit in which this work is written, building upon the work and efforts
of biblical scholars who first practiced social-scientific criticism of the bible in the sixties
and seventies. This work applies the social identity theory from social psychology to
Galatians in order to determine why Pauls rhetoric was persuasive, and to gain insights
into Pauls choice of rhetoric. This brief overview will map everything out and hopefully
make the work easier to follow.
The first chapter covers the basics of the social identity theory (SIT). The chapter
reviews the origins and development of SIT. It also covers key concepts of social
identity, groups, prototypes, depersonalization, social categorization, social identity
motivations, and the influence of groups. The first chapter simply lays out the basic
features of SIT.
2
The second chapter then builds upon this by exploring specific features and
developments of SIT that will be applied to Galatians. The chapter examines the
uncertainty-identity theory, superordinate identity, depersonalized social attraction, and
the social identity theory of leadership. The uncertainty-identity theory provides insights
into how the civil and political unrest in Jerusalem influenced Pauls opponents and thus
contributed to the situation in Galatia. The immediate cause of the dispute in Galatia was
a disagreement over mixed table fellowship. Uncertainty-identity theory suggests that the
uncertainty created in Jerusalem likely reinforced the opponents commitment to their
Jewish identity, making them all the more adamant in the face of this challenge.
The research covering superordinate identity sheds light upon the development of
the newly forming Christian identity, which is in its infancy in Galatia. A superordinate
identity encompasses other identities to form one larger group. In other words, a Muslim,
Christian, and Jew can all be American, while still belonging to their religious groups.
Research on superordinate identity explains that in order to be successful, a superordinate
identity should not threaten the subordinate identities that it subsumes. In other words,
Being American must not undermine what it means to be a Jew. By incorporating and
reinterpreting the Jewish identity in Galatians, Paul is more effectively arguing for a
superordinate identity that includes both Jews and Gentiles.
Finally, the concept of depersonalized social attraction and the social identity
theory of leadership help one understand how Paul was perceived by his audience, and
how his rhetoric shaped this perception. In essence, the more prototypical (i.e. the better a
Christian and Jew) Paul was, the more effective of a leader he would have been when
dealing with people he was not personally acquainted with.
3
The third chapter concludes this coverage of SIT with a survey of social identity
research done on modern religions. The research covered there shows that the above
principles of SIT apply to modern religious practice and that religious identities do
function as powerful social identities.
Chapter four serves as a bridge, connecting the application of SIT in the modern
day to work done on the New Testament (NT). The chapter starts by covering the origins
of social-scientific criticism in the NT. It examines some of the methodological
assumptions of social-scientific criticism, some of its advantages, and some of its
assumptions. It also looks at some of the foundational works in this area, such as the
work of Gerd Theissen, Bruce Malina, and Wayne Meeks. Finally, the chapter ends with
a survey of work that has already applied SIT to the NT, including the work of Philip
Esler, who has done significant work on Galatians. While chapter three establishes the
applicability of SIT to modern religion, chapter four establishes its applicability to the
ancient world and surveys the previous work that serves as a precedent for this approach.
Chapter five then begins the assessment. Chapter five brings SIT to bear upon the
political unrest that surrounded Jerusalem for hundreds of years. Doing so serves two
purposes. First, by using SIT to look at the causes of the various rebellions that occurred,
one can identify key aspects of the Jewish identity, which serve as boundary markers,
separating them from other groups. Second, the uncertainty-identity theory predicts that
this social unrest, and the uncertainty that it created, would have motivated people to
identify more strongly with their social identities. In other words, Jews with strong
religious ties to Jerusalem would have responded to this uncertainty by more strongly
identifying with their Jewish faith.
4
This is likely what happened with Pauls opponents. Although they were
followers of Jesus, they had religious ties with Jerusalem, and were probably Jewish.
Therefore, the uncertainty created by the civil unrest in Jerusalem probably motivated
them to more adamantly defend the traditional Jewish practices. Thus, in response to the
immediate threat of mixed table fellowship, they adamantly defended their Jewish
identity. Finally, chapter five concludes by looking at the circumstances surrounding
Galatians, such as its authorship, date, and the reason for its composition.
Chapter six begins the transition into looking directly at Galatians by briefly
looking at the history of rhetorical analysis carried out on the letter. It notes some of the
pitfalls of research that has been done, and the inadequacy of analyzing the letter in light
of ancient rhetoric. It then examines some of the similarities and differences between a
rhetorical approach and the one taken here.
After this, chapter seven begins the analysis of Galatians in detail by looking at
the prototypical behaviors found in Galatians and how Paul modifies them. Prototypical
behaviors are those behaviors that define the group and that are adhered to by good group
members. Paul addresses the law, a set of prototypical behaviors, in Galatians in response
to his opponents and the behavior of the people in Galatia.
SIT shows that Pauls chosen response, to emphasize faith, the spirit, and the
promise, is effective because it builds upon preexisting group prototypes. Faith, in this
case, is not a Christian concept, it is a Jewish concept. The faithfulness of the Jewish
people to God is one of their defining characteristics, and is often connected directly to
observing the law. Paul instead separates these two concepts, and emphasizes one (faith)
over the other (the law). By separating and reinterpreting preexisting group prototypes,
5
Paul is able to effectively shift the groups boundaries. The rhetorics persuasive power
rests less on its logical construction than on its ability to make particular prototypes
salient (i.e. relevant and prominent).
Something similar is seen in chapter eight, which looks at Pauls manipulation of
prototypical figures in Galatians. Like prototypical behaviors, prototypical figures outline
what it means to be a good group member. The most prominent prototypical figures in
Galatians are Abraham and Christ. SIT shows that Pauls arguments surrounding
Abraham were persuasive because Paul was reshaping a prototypical figure. Abraham
defined the group. Thus by reshaping his audiences understanding of Abraham, he was
able to reshape the groups boundaries.
Chapter nine shifts focus slightly and looks at the superordinate identity that Paul
is establishing in Galatians. SIT shows that superordinate identities are more effective
when subordinate identities are protected. Thus Pauls attempts to establish a
superordinate identity are made more persuasive by his reinterpretation of the law and
Abraham. By reinterpreting the traditional Jewish prototypes, he is able to give the
Jewish identity (a subordinate identity) a protected and valued place within the new
superordinate identity. This made it easier for people to adopt the new identity and is one
of the reasons for Pauls success.
Finally, chapter ten focuses on Pauls role as a leader in the early church. The social
identity theory of leadership states that leaders who are more prototypical (i.e. more in
line with the groups standards) will be more effective when the groups identity is
relevent, and when the leader is dealing with people he or she does not know on a
personal level. Therefore, Pauls declarations of his Jewish heritage and of his sufferings
6
as a follower of Christ make him a more effective leader. They make him more
prototypical, more socially attractive, and thus more effective.
Chapter 1: Social Identity Theoretical Model
Origins and Development

Henri Tajfel was the first to develop social identity theory in the early 1970s.
Tajfels interest in social identity was driven by his experiences in the events surrounding
World War II. As a Polish Jew in Europe, Tajfel lived through the rise of the Nazis, the
Holocaust, and postwar relocation. These experiences drove his passion for
understanding prejudice, discrimination, and intergroup conflict. In the events
surrounding World War II Tajfel saw large-scale social movements and phenomena that
could not be adequately explained in terms of personality or interpersonal interactions.
Instead, he saw social forces at work behind individual actions. Tajfels explicit goal was
to avoid the reductionism that guided studies of group behavior at the time. He did not
want to reinterpret group phenomena as the product of personality traits, individual
differences, and interpersonal actions carried out by many people. By avoiding this
reductionism, Tajfel went against the dominant paradigm in social psychology. 1
Tajfels research laid the foundation for work on social identity. An early paper
from 1959 focused on the way in which social pressure can change the way that people
perceive the physical world around them. In other words, an individuals estimation of
the size, weight, or color of an object will change when social pressure is applied. Tajfel
uses this as a starting point and speculates that a similar result may occur when the issue
Michael A. Hogg, "Social Identity Theory," in Contemporary Social Psychological Theories, ed. Peter J.
Burke (Stanford: Stanford Social Sciences, 2006), 112.
8
at hand is abstract (e.g. beauty, pleasantness, intelligence, etc.) instead of physical. 2 This
is a critical insight. It is one of the first steps taken towards understanding groups as
something other than the sum of individual personalities. Following this, Tajfels early
work focuses primarily on the process of categorization. Tajfels 1964 study focused
upon the ways in which people categorize various items (e.g. dots, lines, or shapes).
There had been significant interest in this cognitive process, but at this time it was poorly
understood. As with the study in 1959, this study focuses upon physical objects and their
categorization instead of social categories. 3 He tied this work directly into his study of
prejudice and the cognitive processes behind it.
In the 1970s Tajfels research started to look at social categories and the influence
of a group upon behavior. For example, a 1971 study divided people into groups and then
asked them to distribute rewards and penalties. The people involved favored the group
they belonged to. Not only that, but they attempted to maximize the difference between
their group and the other group, even at the cost of other objective advantages. 4 These
phenomena of group bias (favoring ones group over another) and metacontrast
(maximizing the differences between groups) became key features of SIT.
The first studies, such as the ones just mentioned, divided people into groups
based on a seemly irrelevant criterion (e.g. esthetic preferences). In 1972, Tajfel and
Michael Billig wanted to see if the same group bias occurred when the divisions were
entirely random. Not only was it still present, but discrimination increased when the
notion of group was introduced. It was greater than it had been in other studies where
2
Henri Tajfel, "Quantitative Judgement in Social Perception," British Journal of Psychology 50 (1959): 28.
Henri Tajfel, Alan Richardson, and Louis Everstine, "Individual Consistencies in Categorizing: A Study
of Judgmental Behavior," Journal of Personality 32, no. 1 (1964): 90-108.
4
Henri Tajfel, M. Billig, R. P. Bundy, and C. Flament, "Social Categorization and Intergroup Behaviour,"
European Journal of Social Psychology 1 (1971): 149-77.
3
9
the idea of a group was never explicitly mentioned, even if those groups were decided
by some non-random criterion. 5
During this period, Tajfel also played a key role in the development of the
European Association of Experimental Social Psychology and the European Journal of
Social Psychology. 6 In the early 1970s, Tajfel began to collaborate with John C. Turner.
They brought together Tajfels ideas surrounding social categorization, ethnocentrism,
social comparison, and intergroup relations and united them under the concept of social
identity. 7 Tajfel saw social identity as a combination of the individuals knowledge of the
group and the emotional significance the individual attaches to group membership. 8
Groups are formed when people share the same social identity. These groups then
compete with one another for status. Additionally, the strategies used by group members
in competition vary depending upon their views of intergroup relations (i.e. the
relationship between different groups). This model became known as social identity
theory. 9 Tajfel presented his theory in 1974 and later published it with Turner in 1979. 10
Tajfels contributions to both social psychology and SIT were profound. These words,
written shortly before his death, remain as true today as they were in 1982.
It seems that the future will have to be much longer than the past in the
field of intergroup behavior. The increasing global interdependence since
the end of World War II has enormously increased the diversity and
complexity of intergroup relations. The psychological study of these
problems, which will manage to combine some of our traditional
5
Michael Billig and Henri Tajfel, "Social Categorization and Similarity in Intergroup Behaviour,"
European Journal of Social Psychology 3, no. 1 (1973): 27-52.
6
Henri Tajfel, "Some Developments in European Social Psychology," European Journal of Social
Psychology 2, no. 3 (1972): 307-21.
7
Hogg, "Social Identity Theory," 113.
8
Tajfel, "Some Developments," 307-21.
9
10
Henri Tajfel and J. C. Turner, "An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict," in The Social Psychology
of Intergroup Relations, ed. William G. Austin and Stephen Worchel (Monterey: Brooks/Cole, 1979), 3347.
10
preoccupations with an increased sensitivity to the nature of social
realities, is one of our most important tasks for the future. 11
Tajfels legacy continues to this day.
Social identity research then shifted focus. During the late 1970s and early to mid
1980s Turner focused on developing the social identity theory of the group, which
focused on self-categorization (i.e. viewing ones self as a group member) as the
cognitive dimension of social identity. This period also saw the further development of
referent informational influence. This model describes the ways in which people create
group norms. These norms are based upon the behavior of other prototypical in-group
members and are then internalized by the individual, who then enacts them as part of
their social identity. Also during this period, there was an increased interest in the
motivations of individuals participating in the social identity process.
By the mid-1980s social identity research had begun to spread rapidly. This rapid
growth created a lack of focus and direction, as John Turner points out in the forward of
Michael Hoggs and Dominic Abrams 1988 book Social Identifications. His selective
survey describes research on a wide range of topics, including:
the effects of social categorization on intergroup relations, intergroup
conflict and ethnocentrism (including racial prejudice and inter-ethnic
contact), social change, the social psychology of language, identity and the
self concept, psychological group formation, the distinction between
interpersonal and intergroup behaviour, group cohesion, social attraction,
social influence and conformity, social co-operation (e.g. social
dilemmas and social interaction in mixed-motive settings), crowd
behaviour, group polarization, social stereotyping, attribution theory,
equity theory and the metatheory of social psychology. 12
11
Henri Tajfel, "Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations," Annual Review of Psychology 33 (1982): 32.
Michael A. Hogg and Dominic Abrams, Social Identifications: A Social Psychology of Intergroup
Relations and Group Processes (London: Routledge, 1988), XI.
12
11
Hogg and Abrams 1988 work argues in favor of an integrated social identity approach,
which would incorporate a wide range of concepts.13 Since then there has been a massive
amount of social identity research focused on developing key concepts such as
stereotyping, self-conception, motivation, collective behavior, norms and others. Social
identity theory continues to grow and has gained popularity in fields outside of social
psychology, such as sociology and organizational science. 14
Social Identity
Identity remains a slippery concept. SIT draws a general distinction between
social identity and personal identity. Social identity, as defined by SIT, is centered on the
social group. A social group is a group of three or more people that share a common
identity. They evaluate themselves in the same way and share a definition of who they
are, what their characteristics are, and how they compare to and relate to people that do
not belong to their group. Group membership is a matter of collective self-construal
we and us versus them. 15 Thus an individuals social identity comes out of his or
her awareness of belonging to a group, and the importance placed upon this membership.
The groups that an individual belongs to are designated as in-groups. The groups that the
individual does not belong to are designated as out-groups. Furthermore, social identity,
as founded upon group membership, becomes the basis for in-group/out-group
distinctions. One individuals in-group is another individuals out-group. SIT focuses on
both how the in-group/out-group distinction arises and how it influences behavior.
13
Hogg and Abrams, Social Identifications, XIII.

Hogg, "Social Identity Theory," 113-14.
15
14
12
In contrast to social identity, personal identity focuses on the characteristics of the
individual that are not shared. Personal identity is a self-construal in terms of
idiosyncratic personality attributes that are not shared with other people (I) or personal
dyadic relationships with a specific other person (me and you). 16 Social identities
often shape the development of personal identities, friendships, and enmities. It is
important to note that people can have many different personal and social identities,
limited only by the number of social groups they belong to and personal relationships
they have.
The subjective importance, value, and accessibility of these identities vary from
person to person. The accessibility of these identities varies in both chronic accessibility,
how accessible it is in an individuals mind, and situational accessibility, how accessible
it is in an immediate situation. An identity that is currently prominent in the mind is said
to be salient. Additionally, an individuals sense of identity varies from situation to
situation, and it is important to note that in any given situation only one identity is
psychologically salient to govern self-construal, social perception, and social conduct. As
the situation or context changes, so does the salient identity, or the form that the identity
takes. 17
The concepts of social and personal identity are generally accepted within the
study of SIT; athough some refinements, variations, and alternatives have been
suggested. For example, Anne Reid and Kay Deaux discuss personal attributes rather
than personal identities. They define attributes to be the personality traits,
16
17

13
characteristics, and behaviors that an individual uses in self-description. 18 Deaux,
working with others, also found support for different categories of social identity. Their
research suggested five categories: personal relationships, vocations/avocations,
political affiliations, ethnic/religious groups, and stigmatized groups. 19
Rather than looking at different categories of social identity, James Cameron
examines whether social identity is a single-faceted concept or is better represented by
several separable facets. 20 Cameron suggests three facets: centrality, in-group affect, and
in-group ties. Centrality refers to the enduring psychological salience of group
membership, while in-group affect reflects the value ascribed to it. Finally, in-group ties
deal with the relationships developed with other group members. 21
Some scholars view the dichotomy drawn between social and personal identities
as too stark. 22 For example, Marilynn B. Brewer and Wendi Gardner suggest three
categories of self: personal self, relational self, and collective self. Personal self is the
differentiated, individuated self-concept . . . relational self is the self-concept derived
from connections and role relationships with significant others . . . [and] at the group
level is the collective self, which corresponds to the concept of social identity. 23 Brewer
also later wrote an article suggesting four categories of identity: person-based social
identities, relational social identities, group-based social identities, and collective
identities. Person-based social identities refer to social identities that are located within
18
Anne Reid and Kay Deaux, "Relationship between Social and Personal Identities: Segregation or
Integration," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71, no. 6 (1996): 1084-91.
19
Kay Deaux, Anne Reid, Kim Mizrahi, and Kathleen A. Ethier, "Parameters of Social Identity," Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology 68, no. 2 (1995): 280.
20
James E. Cameron, "A Three-Factor Model of Social Identity," Self and Identity 3, no. 3 (2004): 239.
21
Cameron, "A Three-Factor Model," 253.
22
23
Marilynn B. Brewer and Wendi Gardner, "Who Is This 'We'? Levels of Collective Identity and Self
Representations," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71, no. 1 (1996): 84.
14
the individual. These identities are aspects of the self that are heavily influenced by
membership in groups and shared socialization experiences. Relational social identities,
like the role identities mentioned by other scholars, define the self in relation to others.
This category includes a wide range of group identities such as familial relationships,
close personal relationships, occupational role relationships, work teams, social clubs,
and others. Group-based social identity is viewed in the same way as social identity in
social identity theory and Turners self-categorization theory. Finally, collective identity
focuses on the norms, values, and ideologies of the group and can represent the
achievement of collective efforts. 24
The concept of the relational self or relational social identity and its relationship
to the personal and social identity categories of SIT is particularly interesting. On the one
hand, when discussed in terms of dyadic relationships that separate people from the
group, as is seen in individualist cultures, relational social identities are best described as
personal identities. On the other hand, in collectivist cultures group membership can be
defined in terms of peoples relationships to one another your network of relationships
locates you within the group and maintains your membership. Here relational identity is
how social identity is expressed. 25
While the distinctions, refinements, and variations on the concepts of social and
personal identity presented here are important, this work will use the terms social identity
and personal identity to refer to collective self-construal and individual self-construal
respectively. These definitions reflect the basic understanding of identity found within
SIT. They are also easily applied to the NT, given that early followers of Jesus formed
24
Marilynn B. Brewer, "The Many Faces of Social Identity: Implications for Political Psychology,"
Political Psychology 22, no. 1 (2001): 119.
25
15
social identities, of collective self-construal, where groups were explicitly defined,
adhered to, and used as a point of social comparison. Unfortunately, given the nature of
historical texts, some information is absent. It is impossible to ask Paul to clarify his
arguments or discuss new topics. It is also impossible to interview members of his
congregations. In light of this, it is important to use SIT and its concept of identity
carefully in order to illuminate the subject without moving beyond either the explanatory
scope of SIT or the data provided by the NT.
Groups
While social identity is collective self-construal, and this forms the basis for a
group, it is important to look at the concept of a group in more detail. To start with, two
people do not form a group. SIT does not view dyads as groups for three main reasons.
First, the interactions within a dyad are dominated by interpersonal processes. Second,
three people are necessary for inferring group norms from others. These norms are
inferred by watching the way that other people interact within a group. If there are only
two people, it is impossible to witness two other group members interacting. Finally,
many group processes (e.g. coalition formation, majority social pressure, and deviance
processes) cant happen. This view of dyads reflects the views of many researchers.
It is possible for two people to reflect a group if they belong to a larger social
identity. For example, a Japanese couple visiting the United States might behave in a
Japanese way, but this is not because the two people form their own group. It is because
they belong to a larger social identity, they belong to the group Japanese. Indeed, a
16
single individual may reflect the norms of a group and be representational of their
identity; but this is only possible because they belong to a larger group. 26
While three or more people are necessary for group formation, they are not
sufficient. The key distinction, from the perspective of social identity, is that the
individuals identify with the group. Many things, such as group structure, interaction,
shared goals, etc., contribute to the distinctive and cohesive nature of a group. 27 These
things may strengthen identification; but it is the underlying psychological process of
identification that is the basis of group phenomena. As a result, groups vary in ways that
reflect the variation in identity discussed earlier. One general distinction is drawn
between groups based upon interpersonal bonds and group based upon formalized and
impersonal associations. While these distinctions might be important, the SIT sees them
as secondary to the role played by group identification. A person might belong to a
group, either based upon interpersonal relationships or formalized associations, but if that
person does not identify with the group, if he or she does not define and evaluate
themselves in terms of the group, then they will not think and act like group members. 28
Prototypes, Categorization, and Entitativity

As concepts, social identity and group are defined as the shared self-construal of
three or more people who identify with one another. An individuals ability to recognize,
define, and distinguish these social identities from one another, a process of
categorization, is key. The theory of social identity rests on an assumption that
26

Donald T. Campbell, "Common Fate, Similarity, and Other Indices of the Status of Aggregates of
Persons as Social Entities," Behavioral Science 3 (1958): 14-25; David L. Hamilton and Steven J. Sherman,
"Perceiving Persons and Groups," Psychological Review 103, no. 2 (1996): 336-55.
28
27
17
categorization is the process by which people order, and render predictable, information
about the world in which they live. This process of categorization operates on objects,
other people, and oneself, and consequently people are seen as belonging to the same or
different categories as oneself. 29 Groups, and thus social identities, are fundamentally
categories of people. These categories are represented cognitively as prototypes. A
prototype is a fuzzy set of attributes (perceptions, attitudes, feelings, and behaviors) that
are related to one another in a meaningful way and that simultaneously capture
similarities within the group and differences between the group and other groups or
people who are not in the group. 30
The process of describing the similarities within and the differences between the
group and others maximizes entitativity. Entitativity refers to the property of a category
that makes it appear to be a cohesive and clearly structured entity that is distinct from
other entities. 31 In other words, prototypes maximize entitativity by highlighting
similarities within the group and differences between groups. Prototypes also follow the
metacontrast principle. They highlight similarities within a group and differences
between groups, creating the largest possible contrast between the in-group and outgroups. 32
This has various consequences. First, the content of the prototype will focus on
those things which maximize metacontrast in a positive way for the in-group (i.e. a group
would not demean itself simply for the sake of entitativity). Second, because prototypes
29
Hogg and Abrams, Social Identifications, 209.

31
Hogg, "Social Identity Theory," 118. For a more in depth discussion of the definition, measurement, and
implications of entitativity see Hamilton and Sherman, "Perceiving Persons," 336-55.
32
Michael A. Hogg and Deborah J. Terry, Social Identity Processes in Organizational Contexts
(Philadelphia: Psychology Press, 2001), 5.
30
18
seek to maximize entitativity, they tend to describe ideal, often hypothetical, in-group
members. Such ideals highlight the distinctiveness of the group more effectively than a
prototype that reflects average and typical members. Third, prototypes vary from
situation to situation. They reflect the social context. This is because metacontrast
involves comparisons made both within the group (intragroup) and between groups
(intergroup). Finally, intragroup behavior and intergroup behavior are directly related, as
one affects the other. 33
Social Categorization and Depersonalization

Social categorization is the mechanism behind prototypes and is the cognitive
basis of social identity processes. Social categorization refers to the process of
categorizing someone as a member of a group. This involves both categorizing people as
well as depersonalizing them. Depersonalization is the act of viewing a person in terms of
group membership and in comparison to group prototypes, instead of as a unique
individual. This also involves ascribing prototypical attributes to the individual.
This should not be confused with dehumanization. Dehumanization refers to the
act of viewing someone as less then human, or unworthy of humane treatment. In
contrast, depersonalization only refers to viewing someone in light of a prototype. This
often leads to a positive evaluation, particularly when dealing with in-group prototypes.
This, however, can lead to negative evaluations, particularly if the prototype comes from
an out-group. Depersonalization of out-group members is often called stereotyping. 34
33
34

Hogg, "Social Identity Theory," 118-19.
19
The key to SIT is that this process happens not only with in-group members and
out-group members, but also with an individuals sense of self. The individual
depersonalizes oneself. This change in self-perception is important. It brings the
perception of the self and ones behavior in line with the relevant in-group prototypes.
One begins to behave as a member of a group, rather than as an individual. This process
produces, for instance, normative behavior, stereotyping, ethnocentrism, positive
ingroup attitudes and cohesion, cooperation and altruism, emotional contagion and
empathy, collective behavior, shared norms, and mutual influence. 35
It is also important to look at the psychological saliency of social categories. As
mentioned above, people depersonalize themselves and others by associating individuals
with relevant prototypes. These prototypes follow the metacontrast principle and thus
serve to maximize entitativity by emphasizing intragroup similarities and intergroup
differences. Given that this process is shaped by the relevant social context, social
identities must shift in relative importance, some being more relevant to a particular
situation then others. For example, an individuals social identity as an American may be
particularly relevant when that person is traveling in South Africa, yet fade into the
background when the individual returns to the United States. The prominence that
particular social identities carry in the mind is referred to as psychological saliency. The
cognitive system compares details of the present social context to social categories and
activates (i.e. makes salient) the social identity that frames the present context and ones
place within it in the most meaningful way. 36
35
36
Hogg and Terry, Social Identity Processes, 5.

20
Accessibility and Fit
This application of social categories to particular situations is often talked about
in terms of accessibility and fit. The accessibility of a category refers to its availability.
Categories can be both chronically accessible and situational accessible. A category is
chronically accessible if it is considered important and frequently used. In contrast, a
category is situational if the immediate situation itself makes it particularly salient. 37
The fit of a given category is often described in terms of structural (or
comparative) fit and normative fit. Structural fit refers to how relevant a category is for
describing the similarities and differences among people. In contrast, normative fit refers
to a categorys ability to account for context-specific behaviors. 38 When presented with a
new social context, people examine various social categories and their relationship with
the immediate social context. Those that fit poorly, either because they fail to account for
the differences and similarities found between individuals (structural fit) or they fail to
explain the observed behavior (normative fit), lose saliency. When this happens, people
cycle through various categories (e.g. political orientation, religion, profession) until the
optimal fit is achieved.
That said, saliency is not the mechanical product of the best categorical fit and it
is not entirely automatic. For example, people prefer categories that favor their in-group.
Additionally, the process can also be social in nature with people negotiating or
competing over the saliency of different categories. 39 This social interaction involves
the motivated manipulation of symbols (e.g., through speech, appearance, behavior) by
people who are strategically competing with one another to influence the frame of
37

39
38
21
reference within which accessibility and fit interact. 40 People are not willing to passively
accept whatever category naturally has the best fit. Instead they are active participants,
seeking out those categorizations that are the most meaningful and favorable for them. 41
The category that emerges from this process with the best fit becomes
psychologically salient. This category then becomes the basis for prototype-based
depersonalization, group identification, and self-categorization. It forms the basis of
context-relevant intergroup behaviors by enhancing the entitativity of the group and by
highlighting in-group similarities and out-group differences. 42 In this way, the
psychological saliency of social categories is the product of a dynamic process that
adjusts to fit the specific circumstances of the individual.
Social Identity Motivations

While the discussion up to this point has focused on the processes underlying
social identity, it is important to examine the motivations that lie behind the behavior.
One of the motives that SIT focuses on is self-enhancement. The other main motivation,
uncertainty reduction, will be examined in detail later. Social identities play a central role
in self-enhancement. Given a relevant social context, social categories become
psychologically salient, and thus the self, as social identity, is defined and evaluated in
group terms, and therefore the status, prestige, and social valence of the group attaches to
oneself. 43 This causes people to promote the positive distinctiveness of their group,
40

42
43
41
22
which is the belief that we (those belonging to the in-group) are better then them
(those belonging to an out-group).
This close relationship between ones social identity and ones sense of self has
led to the suggestion that self-enhancement and group membership may be related to an
individuals sense of self-esteem. The self-esteem hypothesis suggests that individuals
with low self-esteem are motivated to identify with a group and that intergroup behavior
and identification raises self-esteem. 44 But continued review of the self-esteem
hypothesis has yielded mixed results. 45 A crucial finding is that although group
adherence can raise self-esteem, it is a relatively unreliable cause of identification. This
supports the idea that rather than motivating behavior, self-esteem is an internal
measurement, gauging the individuals level of satisfaction. Self-esteem reflects the
degree to which other needs and motivations (e.g. the need for rewarding interpersonal
relationships) are being met. Ultimately, although the connection between selfenhancement and social identity processes is undeniable, the link between self-esteem
and positive group distinctiveness is not always tight. This is also seen in the ability of
people to buffer themselves against stigmatizing group membership. 46
The Influence of Groups

Groups can have a large impact upon both the behavior of an individual and what
they consider to be normal and acceptable behavior. We can informally experience this
44
Hogg, "Social Identity Theory," 120. See also: C. Sedikides and M. J. Strube, "Self-Evaluation: To Thine
Own Self Be Good, to Thine Own Self Be Sure, to Thine Own Self Be True, and to Thine Own Self Be
Better," in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed. M. P. Zanna (New York: Academic Press,
1997), 209-96; Hogg and Abrams, Social Identifications.
45
Dominic Abrams and Michael A. Hogg, "Comments on the Motivational Status of Self-Esteem in Social
Identity and Intergroup Discrimination," European Journal of Social Psychology 18 (1988): 317-34.
46
23
effect first hand. For example, more then once I have found myself, as a student of
religion, attending a religious service that I was unfamiliar with. In these situations I find
myself compelled to emulate the behavior I see around me. I am acting out the normal
behavior of the group in order to, at least temporarily, become a participating member of
that group. SIT has formalized the study of this process.
The study of the influence groups exert and the norms they establish is not new. 47
The development of SIT provided a new theoretical framework for understanding this
influence. SIT understands the influence exerted by the group to be a product of the
relationship between group norms and the process of self-categorization. Norms are those
attitudes and behaviors that define the group. Cognitively, these norms are represented by
the groups prototypes. As discussed above, prototypes can be either ideals to which the
group holds or can be represented by people who represent the ideal group member (e.g.
Jesus, Abraham). This is then met by the process of self-categorization and
depersonalization, in which a person sees oneself through the lens of the prototype. The
person is no longer an individual, but instead a group member, defined by and evaluated
against the groups prototypes. This produces conformity to in-group norms because the
self is brought inline with the prototype. Thus conformity is not surface behavioral
compliance but a deeper process whereby peoples behavior is transformed to correspond
to the appropriate self-defining group prototype. 48
The influence of groups upon the individual has been demonstrated
experimentally numerous times. Early research demonstrated both the influence that
47
George R. Goethals, "A Century of Social Psychology: Individuals, Ideas, and Investigations," in The
Sage Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. Michael Hogg and Joel Cooper (London: Sage Publications,
2007), 3-23.
48
24
groups have upon the attitudes of individuals and the long term consequences of such
influence. 49 It is worth looking at some specific examples. One relevant phenomenon is
group polarization. Group polarization refers to the process in which an individuals
views become more extreme after they discuss them with other like minded individuals.
For example, five people who support same-sex marriage will support it more strongly
after discussing it with each other. This phenomenon was first observed in the 1961 by
James Stoner. Early research looked at situations in which group discussion increased
risky choices. The phenomenon was originally called the risky-shift phenomenon.
Eventually it was realized that this was incorrect. Experiments showed that the
phenomenon could lead to more cautious choices as well as riskier ones. Thus it has since
become known as group polarization. 50
Explaining the cause of group polarization has been difficult, but resent research
has made progress understanding the phenomenon in light of SIT. 51 According to SIT,
polarization is the consequence of an individuals conformity to a perceived in-group
norm. Research has started to support this understanding. For example, two experiments
conducted by Diane Mackie demonstrated the importance of the group. The first
experiment found that polarization occurred when the relevant information was provided
by the individuals in-group. The second experiment found that polarization occurred
49
T. M. Newcomb, Personality and Social Change: Attitude Formation in a Student Community (New
York: Dryden Press, 1943). Newcomb studied the views of women who attended the newly formed
Bennington College. The women, who were mostly conservative, were influenced by the more liberal
norms of the college. His follow-up study found that these changed persisted in the women for years to
come.
50
David G. Myers and Helmut Lamm, "The Group Polarization Phenomenon," Psychological Bulletin 83
(1976): 602-03.
51
For example, Isenberg examines the social comparison and persuasive argumentation explanations in
Daniel J. Isenberg, "Group Polarization: A Critical Review and Meta-Analysis," Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 50 (1986): 1141-51. Along these lines, Abrams divides previous explanations into two
general categories, pressure to comply and reasons to agree. See Dominic Abrams and Michael A. Hogg,
"Social Identification, Self-Categorization and Social Influence," European Review of Social Psychology 1
(1990): 208.
25
when individuals focused on their group membership, and it did not when they focused
on their individual performance. 52 Other research also supports this understanding. 53
This naturally leads towards an examination of behaviors. Research has
demonstrated that the more strongly a person identifies with a group, the more likely they
are to follow the behavioral prescriptions of the group. For example, two studies were
conducted that examined the relationship between the level of group identification and an
individuals intention to carry out a prescribed behavior. In the first study, the behavior
was to engage in regular exercise. In the second it was to engage in sun-protective
behavior. In both cases the group norm had an effect on those individuals that identified
strongly with the group. It was also found that an individuals attitude and the perceived
consequences of not taking action had a larger influence on those people that had a low
level of identification with the group. 54 This fits with the anecdotal observation from the
field of religious studies that increased identification with a particular religious group
often correlates with an increased devotion to its teachings.
The ability for group norms to influence our behavior serves an important social
function. Namely, it combats loafers. People work collectively towards goals, and often
the outcome of the endeavor is not directly tied to an individuals performance. For
example, people pay taxes in order to fund public schools, police forces, and fire
departments. At the same time, an individual can cheat on their taxes and still enjoy these
benefits because the group succeeds despite the individuals failure to contribute.
52
Diane M. Mackie, "Social Identification Effects in Group Polarization," Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 50 (1986): 702.
53
Abrams and Hogg, "Social Identification," 208-12.
54
Deborah J. Terry and Michael A. Hogg, "Group Norms and the Attitude-Behavior Relationship: A Role
for Group Identification," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 22 (1996): 776.
26
That people loaf is well established. 55 Social identities and the norms that they
establish can encourage greater participation and contribution from individuals. Research
has shown that an individuals level of participation in collective action is influenced by
both a cost/benefit consideration and an individuals social identity. In other words,
people are motivated both by specific extrinsic rewards and by the obligations found in
their social identity. 56 While the influence of social identities upon group participation is
well established, the reason social identity has such a strong influence is less clear.
Research is beginning to shed light on the problem. One paper looked at two
possible explanations for the phenomenon. The first was the goal-transformation
hypothesis. It suggests that social identification makes the collective good more
important to the individual. The second was the goal-amplification hypothesis. It suggests
that social identification lead to a greater level of trust in the cooperation of the other
group members. The three studies conducted supported the goal-transformation
hypothesis. This suggests that social identification promotes cooperation because the
individuals motives are transformed, shifting towards the interests of the group. 57
Taken together with the research above, it becomes clear that social identities
have a clear impact upon the attitude and behavior of the individuals who adopt them.
This is the result of self-categorization and depersonalization. People see themselves as
group members, rather than individuals. Thus their attitudes shift towards those of the
group, and their behavior is influenced by the groups norms.
55
S. J. Karau and K. D. Williams, "Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration,"
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65 (1993): 681-706.
56
S. Strmer and B. Simon, "Collective Action: Towards a Dual-Pathway Model," European Review of
Social Psychology 15 (2004): 59.
57
D. De Cremer and M. Van Vugt, "Social Identification Effects in Social Dilemmas: A Transformation of
Motives," European Journal of Social Psychology 29 (1999): 871-93.
27
Chapter 2: Specific Features of Social Identity Theory
Uncertainty-Identity Theory
This chapter will highlight some specific features of SIT that will be particularly
relevant for this study of Galatians. Uncertainty-identity theory is the first specific feature
of SIT that will be examined. Alongside self-enhancement, the desire to reduce
uncertainty is one of the motivational factors that drives people to adopt and emphasis
various social identities. When people feel uncertainty about themselves or things
reflecting on self, they join new groups (e.g., sign up as a member of an environmental
group), identify with or identify more strongly with existing self-inclusive categories
(e.g., ones nation), or identify with or identify more strongly with groups that they
already belong to (e.g., ones work team). 58 Over the last decade, the roll that
uncertainty plays within SIT has increasingly become a focus of study in and of itself.
The term uncertainty-identity theory refers to this pursuit and reflects the further
development of this motivational component of SIT. 59
It is important to start by looking at uncertainty. While uncertainty motivates
people to adopt and emphasize social identities, not all uncertainties are created equal.
Feelings of uncertainty related to an individuals sense of self are the most critical. For
example, someone may know very little about Botswana, the African country. They may
be uncertain about its location, language, and cultural customs, but this uncertainty will
not influence their sense of self and their social identity if it seems irrelevant. On the
58
Michael A. Hogg, "Uncertainty-Identity Theory," in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed.

Mark P. Zanna (San Diego: Elsevier Academic Press, 2007), 80.
59
Hogg, "Uncertainty-Identity Theory," 69.
28
other hand, if the individual decides to marry a person from Botswana, move to
Botswana, and seek citizenship, suddenly this uncertainty becomes very relevant to ones
sense of self and social identity. This type of uncertainty, self-uncertainty, is the focus of
uncertainty-identity theory and a key motivational component of SIT. 60
Additionally, uncertainty-identity theory focuses on uncertainty that corresponds
to the social context surrounding an individual. This uncertainty is produced by
contextual factors that challenge peoples certainty about their cognitions, perceptions,
feelings, and behaviours, and ultimately, certainty about and confidence in their sense of
self. 61 Finally, it is important to note that uncertainty-identity theory examines
uncertainty-reduction, not certainty creation. Absolute certainty does not exist, and
instead of pursuing it, people seek to reduce their levels of uncertainty. 62
Research has emerged to support the claims of the uncertainty-identity theory.
Early studies of uncertainty focused upon the minimal group paradigm. The minimal
group paradigm emerged from early studies in social psychology that found that people
will display intergroup biases even when placed in seemly arbitrary and meaningless
groups. The minimal conditions needed to create this effect became known as the
minimal group paradigm.
The minimal group paradigm was an appropriate starting place for three reasons.
First, the minimal group paradigm played a critical role in the creation of SIT. Second, it
seemed unlikely that self-enhancement would be the only cause behind the intergroup
discrimination in these clinical situations. Finally, research utilizing the minimal group
60

62
Hogg, "Uncertainty-Identity Theory," 73-74.
61
29
paradigm naturally creates uncertainty in the participants due to the novel nature of the
experience. 63
The first paper examining uncertainty in this way was published in 1999. Two
experiments were conducted that manipulated the levels of uncertainty felt by the
participants and examined how this affected their intergroup biases. Beyond looking at
uncertaintys roll, the study also examined the critical question of whether or not
categorization itself is sufficient to cause intergroup discrimination. The study found that
participants only discriminated when categorized under conditions of uncertainty. This
correlated with enhanced group identification and elevated self-esteem. Additionally it
was found that categorization, while necessary, was not sufficient to cause
discrimination. Self-categorization, motivated in this case by uncertainty, is a necessary
prerequisite for discrimination. 64
Further research continues to support uncertainty-identity theory. A 2005 paper
looked at the relationship between uncertainty, group status, and prototypicality. In the
first experiment, uncertainty and group status were manipulated. As predicted, it was
found that individuals with low levels of uncertainty preferred to identify with high-status
groups, while individuals with high levels of uncertainty showed no preference between
high or low status groups. The individuals under high levels of uncertainty where more
strongly motivated to identify with a group, in order to reduce their uncertainty. Because
of this, they were more willing to associate with a group regardless of its status. In
addition to this, the strength of their group identification was higher then those
63

Paul G. Grieve and Michael A. Hogg, "Subjective Uncertainty and Intergroup Discrimination in the
Minimal Group Situation," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 25 (1999): 926.
64
30
experiencing low levels of uncertainty. Greater levels of uncertainty caused individuals to
identify with their groups more strongly.
A second experiment added prototypicality to the mix. The individuals
identification with a low status group, under high uncertainty, decreased when
prototypicality was low. In other words, individuals are attracted to groups that fit
themselves. 65 Prototypes play a key role in SIT, not only in uncertainty-identity theory,
but in other areas as well. Its presence will be seen in the rest of this chapter.
Over the last five years, further research of the uncertainty-identity theory has tied
uncertainty to many different phenomena observed by the SIT. A paper published in 2007
looked at the relationship between group-norms and uncertainty. The study found that
individuals under high levels of uncertainty are more likely to conform to group norms. 66
Another paper published in 2007 looked at the relationship between uncertainty
and in-group entitativity. Two experiments were done, one was a field study dealing with
political parties, and the other was a done with ad hoc groups. Both experiments
supported the studys hypothesis. Individuals identify most strongly with a group when
both their uncertainty and the groups entitativity are high. In other words, in times of
high uncertainty, people identify with groups that are cohesive, clearly structured, and
distinct from other groups. 67
Another paper, from 2009, looked at striking grocery store employees in one
experiment, and Democrats and Republicans in a second. It found that when individuals
65
Scott A. Reid and Michael A. Hogg, "Uncertainty Reduction, Self-Enhancement, and Ingroup
Identification," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 31 (2005): 804-17.
66
Joanne R. Smith, Michael A. Hogg, Robin Martin, and Deborah J. Terry, "Uncertainty and the Influence
of Group Norms in the Attitude-Behaviour Relationship," British Journal of Social Psychology, no. 46
(2007): 769-92.
67
Michael A. Hogg, David K. Sherman, Joel Dierselhuis, Angela T. Maitner, and Graham Moffitt,
"Uncertainty, Entitativity, and Group Identification," Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43
(2007): 135-42.
31
are faced with a highly entitative in-group, and a high level of uncertainty, they polarize
their groups position in relation to the out-group. In other words, when an individual
belongs to a cohesive and distinct group (e.g. Democrats), and they experience
uncertainty, they polarize their position, taking a stronger stance against their opponents
(e.g. Republicans). 68
The papers presented here are representational of a growing body of research that
is beginning to tie uncertainty reduction theory into real world situations. Specifically, the
link between uncertainty and ideological positions is becoming clearer. Uncertainty,
particularly extreme cases of uncertainty, can be associated with orthodoxy, hierarchy,
extremism, and ideological belief systems. This can contribute to groups with strong
identities, following simple and highly focused beliefs. Such groups have a low tolerance
for disagreements and clear group norms which one has to follow. 69 This can lead to a
polarization of positions and a strict adherence to the groups moral and ethical standards,
creating a stronger sense of community and group identity.
Superordinate Identity
Superordinate identity is the second feature of SIT that will be examined. The
idea behind superordinate identities is straight forward. People often belong to more than
one social group. For example, someone may be both Jewish and an American. Both are
social identities, and they each become salient under different circumstances. In this
example American can become a superordinate identity. This is because being Jewish
68
David K. Sherman, Michael A. Hogg, and Angela T. Maitner, "Perceived Polarization: Reconciling
Ingroup and Intergroup Perceptions under Uncertainty," Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 12
(2009): 95-109.
69
Michael A. Hogg, "Uncertainty, Social Identity, and Ideology," in Advances in Group Processes, ed. S.
R. Thye and E. J. Lawler (New York: Elsevier, 2005), 203-29.
32
can be viewed as a subset of the category American. Just as there are JewishAmericans, there are also Christian-Americans, Muslim-Americans, Hindu-Americans,
Buddhist-Americans, and so on. Being American is a social identity that supersedes the
individual identities of the various groups and unites the subgroups in a larger social
identity. The formation of superordinate identities has important implications, from
corporate mergers to dealing with racism and discrimination. Because of this, it has been
the focus of a great deal of research.
Unfortunately, reducing discrimination is not as simple as creating a
superordinate identity. Studies have found a complex interaction between the
superordinate group and the subgroups. A paper published in 2000 looked at university
students (superordinate identity). Some of the students were from the humanities and
others from math and science (subgroups). The experiment manipulated their perception
of intersubgroup similarity. In other words it manipulated the perceived similarity
between humanities students and math-science students.
The experiment also manipulated the level at which students categorized
themselves, either at the superordinate level, or at the superordinate and subgroup level
simultaneously. An interesting pattern emerged. When the students were categorized
exclusively at the superordinate level, discrimination was higher against subgroups seen
as similar to their own.
At first glance, this can seem counter-intuitive and in contradiction to the
similarity-attraction hypothesis, which simply states that people are more attracted to
people similar to themselves. But when the students were categorized at the superordinate
and subgroup levels, their levels of discrimination fell in line with the similarity-
33
attraction hypothesis. The results are consistent with the SIT, which suggests that threats
to ones identity (by being categorized only at the superordinate level) can result in
increased levels of discrimination as individuals try to maintain their identity. 70
Similar results have been found in other studies. 71 This principle is known as the
mutual intergroup differentiation model, which simply states that superordinate identities
can improve relations as long as the integrity of the subgroups is maintained. These
studies have profound implications for attempts to reduce discrimination outside of the
lab. Placing people in a superordinate category can cause problems if the subgroups feel
that their own distinctiveness is threatened. For example, attempts to improve relations
between different religious groups can run into problems if people feel their religious
identity is being undermined by a superordinate category (e.g. spirituality, national
identity). 72 One possible tactic is to emphasis both categories at the same time.
Something like emphasizing the common nature of all religious practice while at the
same time highlighting ones valuable Hindu heritage.
Another study, similarly set up with math-science and humanities students, was
conducted to examine the effects of status on subgroup relations. The study found that the
lower the perceived status of the subgroup, the more strongly people identify with the
superordinate group. This is consistent with the self-enhancement motive in the SIT.
People who find they belonging to a group that is viewed negatively will sometimes try
70
Matthew J. Hornsey and Michael A. Hogg, "Intergroup Similarity and Subgroup Relations: Some
Implications for Assimilation," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 26 (2000): 948-58.
71
Matthew J. Hornsey and Michael A. Hogg, "Subgroup Relations: A Comparison of Mutual Intergroup
Differentiation and Common Ingroup Identity Models of Prejudice Reduction," Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin 26 (2000): 242-56.
72
Maykel Verkuyten, "Religious Group Identification and Inter-Religious Relations: A Study among
Turkish-Dutch Muslims," Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 10, no. 3 (2007): 341-57.
34
to adopt superordinate identities that have a higher status. This allows them to enhance
their identity, and in turn themselves.
In the second experiment of the paper, both levels of identity are reinforced and
thus status does not have an effect on subgroup bias. But status did cause bias to increase
when only the superordinate identity was emphasized. The effect is similar to the one
discussed above, with the added find that high status groups are more protective of their
identity. 73
These experiments have implications for the business world as well. A paper
published in 2002 looked at negations. Some models of negation suggest that group
membership should be downplayed because it can lead to bias. Building off of the
findings mentioned above, this study instead examined the effect of highlighting group
membership at the subgroup level before entering into superordinate negotiations. As
expected, although people identified more at the subgroup level they were also more
satisfied with the negotiation process. 74
The importance of social identities can be seen around the world. A study
conducted in Chile looked at political coalitions as forms of superordinate social
identities. In Chiles multiparty system, coalitions form between the various parties. The
study conducted a survey that asked participants to judge their own party, parties within
their coalition, and parties within opposing coalitions. The parties are understood as
subgroups within the larger superordinate group of the coalition. The results are inline
with the research above. Generally speaking, identification with a coalition, as a
73
Matthew J. Hornsey and Michael A. Hogg, "The Effects of Status on Subgroup Relations," British
Journal of Social Psychology 41 (2002): 203-18.
74
Rachael A. Eggins, S. Alexander Haslam, and Katherine J. Reynolds, "Social Identity and Negotiation:
Subgroup Representation and Superordinate Consensus," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28
(2002): 887-99.
35
superordinate group, correlated with positive attitudes towards allies. Specifically,
positive feelings towards ones own party correlated with positive feelings towards
members of ones own coalition. Additionally, ones views of the coalition impacted
ones views of individuals within the coalition. As in the studies mentioned above,
perceived inter-party distance and political identity threat (a threat to the subgroup) had a
negative impact on the feelings towards coalition party members. 75
When these studies are all taken together it is clear that superordinate identities
are powerful tools for social change and interaction. But it is equally clear that
superordinate identities run the risk of being unproductive when they threaten subgroup
identities. Therefore, one of the most effective strategies for improving relations is to
emphasize the superordinate group while at the same time reinforcing subgroup
distinctiveness and value.
Depersonalized Social Attraction

Depersonalized social attraction is the third feature of the SIT to be examined.
People interact with one another on a daily basis. As part of this process individuals will
like some people better then others. This will happen for many different reasons, and
many different psychological approaches have been developed for understanding this
phenomenon. SIT focuses on one very specific example of attraction, which is
depersonalized social attraction.
Depersonalized social attraction occurs when individuals depersonalized
themselves and others through the process of categorization, and then are attracted to
75
Roberto Gonzlez, Jorge Manzi, Jos L. Saiz, Brewer Marilynn, Pablo de Tezanos-Pinto, David Torres,
Maria Teresa Aravena, and Nerea Aldunate, "Interparty Attitudes in Chile: Coalitions as Superordinate
Social Identities," Political Psychology 29, no. 1 (2008): 93-118.
36
others who match the groups prototype. In other words, when individuals view
themselves and others as group members, they do not evaluate others as individuals.
Instead they evaluate them as group members. Since prototypes set the standards for
groups, the more prototypical people are, the better they appear. In other words, a
Christian will like an outstanding Christian more than an average Christian.
This concept was developed in the early 1990s. In 1993 a paper examined this
phenomenon. Two studies were conducted that looked at the relationship between group
salience, group cohesiveness, clarity of the group prototype, and perceived
prototypicality of the members. The results clearly supported depersonalized social
attraction. When the group identity was salient and individuals were depersonalized,
individuals were more attracted to prototypical group members. The attraction was also
stronger when the group was perceived as cohesive and when the prototype was clearer.
Interpersonal attraction was also measured. Depersonalized attraction was found
to be independent from the interpersonal attraction, and the interpersonal attraction was
also unrelated to issues such as cohesiveness and prototypicality. 76 These findings have
been further supported by additional research.
A paper published in 1995 added more evidence for depersonalized social
attraction. In the experiment, individuals were asked to report their attitudes towards an
individual who was either a group member, or their partner for a task. The study looked
at how prototypicality influenced attraction and the results generally supported the idea
76
Michael A. Hogg, Louise Cooper-Shaw, and David W. Holzworth, "Group Prototypicality and
Depersonalized Attraction in Small Interactive Groups," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 19
(1993): 452-65.
37
that through depersonalization people are more attracted to prototypical group
members. 77
Another paper published in 1998 wanted to examine the relationships between
friendship, group identification, group cohesiveness, and groupthink. Generally speaking,
groupthink arises when a groups striving for unanimity overrides other practical
considerations and prevents the group from realistically evaluating its situation. This can
lead to various problems, such as an unquestioned belief in the morality and
invulnerability of the group. It also leads to problems in the decision making process.
Groupthinks impact upon politics and other social situations has made it a popular topic
for study, but the causes behind it have been less clearly understood.
Many factors can contribute to groupthink. The primary antecedent is group
cohesiveness. The 1998 paper sought to better understand how cohesiveness could lead to
groupthink by drawing a distinction between cohesion based upon personal attraction
(friendship) and cohesion based upon depersonalized social attraction. The experiment
placed people into four-person discussion groups that were formed with friends, socially
attractive people, or random strangers. Conditions were then set up to encourage group
think. The results showed that friendship was weakly or negatively related to groupthink.
Friendship based cohesiveness was not conducive for groupthink. On the other hand,
depersonalized social attraction was strongly correlated with groupthink. 78 This is just
one example of the powerful role that depersonalized social attraction can play.
77
Michael A. Hogg, Elizabeth A. Hardie, and Katherine J. Reynolds, "Prototypical Similarity, SelfCategorization, and Depersonalized Attraction: A Perspective on Group Cohesiveness," European Journal
of Social Psychology 25 (1995): 159-77.
78
Michael A. Hogg and S. C. Hains, "Friendship and Group Identification: A New Look at the Role of
Cohesiveness in Groupthink," European Journal of Social Psychology 28 (1998): 323-41.
38
A paper published in 2005 provided tentative support for the idea that
prototypicality can influence the appeal of celebrities, and that media sources are able to
manipulate the perception of prototypicality and thus influence a celebritys appeal. The
experiment involved university students that participated voluntarily. The researchers
also collaborated with the schools newspaper, which printed up 3 fake news stories
reporting upon the intelligence of different racial groups. The students were told that they
were being involved in a study that was looking at intelligence in order for the university
to improve its level of education.
The students level of racial identification was measured and used to establish an
in-group for the individuals. Then, through the fake news stories, the prototypical level of
intelligence for the in-group (i.e. different racial groups) was manipulated. The students
were then asked to evaluate various celebrities. As predicted, the more a celebrity
matched the prototypical level of intelligence for the in-group, the more socially
attractive they were. The level of prototypical embodiment was the strongest predictor for
social attraction. 79 The results stress both the importance of depersonalized social
attraction and the powerful effect that media can have on peoples perception of others.
Social Identity Theory of Leadership

Leadership is the fourth feature of SIT to be examined. Over the years there has
been an increasing collaboration between social psychological research on social identity
and organizational psychological research on work groups and organizations. 80 Out of
79
Dana E. Mastro, Ron Tamborini, and Craig R. Hullett, "Linking Media to Prototype Activation and
Subsequent Celebrity Attraction: : An Application of Self-Categorization Theory," Communication
Research 32 (2005): 323-48.
80
39
this dialogue, a SIT of leadership has emerged. There are many different psychological
models of leadership, focusing on different aspects of group/leader interaction. The social
identity theory of leadership studies the role that identity plays in leadership. Groups
form social identities and these social identities have a large impact upon our leadership.
Leaders play a crucial role. We look to our leaders to express and epitomize our identity,
to clarify and focus our identity, to forge and transform our identity, and to consolidate,
stabilize, and anchor our identity. 81
Because leaders can play such a pivotal role in social identities, SIT looks at
leadership in terms of the processes that are behind the formation of social identities.
Through the process of self-categorization people adopt social identities, and through a
process of depersonalization they no longer view themselves as individuals, but instead
evaluate themselves and other in-group members against the in-group prototype. As just
discussed, this leads to depersonalized social attraction. Thus the more a leader reflects
the prototype, the more influence he is likely to have as followers are attracted to him
through depersonalized social attraction. 82 This understanding of leadership has real
world consequences, particularly in the business world where corporate management and
mergers often create changing and shifting social identities.
Research has started to look at challenges facing the work place. A paper
published in 2005 surveyed 242 employees from 3 Italian companies. The study looked at
leader prototypicality and leader effectiveness as mediated by a need for closure. The
need for closure was interpreted as a desire to reduce uncertainty. Thus it was predicted
81
Michael A. Hogg, "Influence and Leadership," in The Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. S. T. Fiske,
Daniel Todd Gilbert, and Gardner Lindzey (New York: Wiley, 2010), 1195.
82
Michael A. Hogg, "A Social Identity Theory of Leadership," Personality and Social Psychology Review
5 (2001): 184-200.
40
that individuals needing closure would turn to their group membership (uncertaintyidentity theory). This turning to the group would increase the importance of leader
prototypicality, therefore making a leaders effectiveness more dependent upon
prototypicality. The results of the survey were inline with the predictions. Prototypicality
was more important for the individuals with a high need of closure than it was for the
individuals with a low need. 83
Another very similar study was conducted in 2010 with 368 people from 4 Italian
companies. Rather than looking at a need for closure, this study introduced role
ambiguity in order to manipulate the level of uncertainty experienced by the subjects. The
results were inline with the previous study. Leader prototypicality was correlated to
leader effectiveness more strongly when the individuals were under higher levels of
uncertainty. 84
This is not to say that leadership is a simple issue. A paper published in 2005
compared the social identity theory of leadership to the leader-member exchange theory.
While SIT looks at leadership in terms of group identity and depersonalization, the
leader-member exchange theory examines the relationships that are formed between
supervisors and subordinates. The study involved two surveys, the first was of 439
employees from organizations in Wales while the second was of 128 members of
organizations in India.
83
Antonio Pierro, Lavinia Cicero, Marino Bonaiuto, Daan van Knippenberg, and Arie W. Kruglanski,
"Leader Group Prototypicality and Leadership Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Need for Cognitive
Closure," The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005): 503-16.
84
Lavinia Cicero, Antonio Pierro, and Daan van Knippenberg, "Leadership and Uncertainty: How Role
Ambiguity Affects the Relationship between Leader Group Prototypicality and Leadership Effectiveness,"
British Journal of Management 21 (2010): 411-21.
41
The results were consistent with those presented above. Depersonalized leadermember relations, based more upon prototypicality and social identity, were found to be
more effective with individuals for whom the group was more salient, and who identified
more strongly with the group. On the other hand, personalized leadership, based upon the
relationships between leaders and their subordinates, was preferred by individuals from
low-salience groups more than by those from high-salience groups. 85
This research highlights the importance of applying theoretical models to their
appropriate context. The social identity theory of leadership provides a powerful tool for
understanding the relationship between leaders and their groups. But the social identity
and the prototypicality of a leader will only be relevant in certain circumstances,
particularly when a groups identity becomes salient and important to its members. In
other circumstances, as illustrated in this study, other models of leadership may be more
applicable.
Further research has begun to look at the possible role that prototypicality
oriented leadership may have on discrimination. A 2006 study conducted in the lab
looked at the relationship between peoples stereotype-based impressions of their leader
and how well that matched the group norm. It was hypothesized that leader effectiveness
would increase the closer the two matched. The results followed those mentioned above.
In high salience groups, highly prototypical leaders were more effective than leaders that
were less prototypical. Similarly, the effectiveness of a prototypical leader was higher the
more salient the groups identity.
85
Michael A. Hogg, Robin Martin, Olga Epitropaki, Aditi Mankad, Alicia Svensson, and Karen Weeden,
"Effective Leadership in Salient Groups: Revisiting Leader-Member Exchange Theory from the
Perspective of the Social Identity Theory of Leadership," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 31
(2005): 991-1004.
42
This research went farther and found that its original hypothesis was true. The
stereotypes attached to leaders have an impact upon how prototypical they are perceived
to be, and thus how effective they are. The study used men, women, and their
accompanying gender stereotypes. It found that people utilized these stereotypes in the
absence of explicit group prototypicality information about their leader. These findings
illuminate some of the problems that can face minorities and other stereotyped groups
within the work place. 86
Finally, research published in 2008 examined the relationship between negative
actions by an out-group leader and the liking of in-group leaders. Two studies were
conducted in which people were presented with a hypothetical international situation in
which the leader from the other nation was portrayed negatively. The first study found
that individuals viewed their leader more favorably when presented with the negative
actions of the out-group leader.
The second study measured levels of national identification. It found that the
intergroup leader-enhancement effect occurred with those individuals that held a strong
national identity, but that it did not occur when individuals identified only weakly. 87 This
follows the previous studies which stress the importance of group saliency. This also
helps explain the attacks that leaders often launch against the leaders of other groups. The
social identity theory of leadership provides a powerful model and tool for understanding
the relationships between leaders and their groups. The fact that it is dependent upon
86
Michael A. Hogg, Kelly S. Fielding, Daniel Johnson, Barbara Masser, Emily Russell, and Alicia
Svensson, "Demographic Category Membership and Leadership in Small Groups: A Social Identity
Analysis," The Leadership Quarterly 17 (2006): 335-50.
87
Todd L. Pittinsky and Brian Welle, "Negative Outgroup Leader Actions Increase Liking for Ingroup
Leaders: An Experimental Test of Intergroup Leader-Enhancement Effects," Group Processes &
Intergroup Relations 11 (2008): 513-23.
43
groups and social identities makes it well suited for historical studies, given that historical
documents often are the product of such groups.
44
Chapter 3: Social Identity and Modern Religion

Before applying SIT to ancient religious practice, it is important to examine the
research that has applied SIT to modern religions. Religions foster naturally occurring
and common social identities, which are often ideally suited for the application of SIT.
This is because so many of the things that the SIT discusses are explicitly stated in the
sacred texts and official decrees of established religions. Things such as prototypes,
group norms (both prescribed and prohibited behaviors), and out-groups are clearly stated
and expounded upon.
This can be compared to social identities found within the business world, an area
of research that has seen recent growth. 88 Businesses can, and often do, have explicitly
documented guidelines for employee behavior (i.e. group norms) that in turn describe the
ideal employee (i.e. the group prototype). Businesses can also have clearly defined rivals
(i.e. out-groups). In this way, social identities from the business world and from religions
are similar, but social identities stemming from religion take a much more prominent
place in peoples lives. Rarely does one hear of employees studying their employee
handbook weekly or wearing corporate jewelry, and there is little marketability for books
condemning corporate rivals. Yet weekly religious services, religious jewelry, and
apologetic literature are all common forms of religious expression. Religions create
powerful social identities that are prime candidates for study under SIT. Unsurprisingly,
research that has been conducted applying the SIT to religious groups has supported the
basic tenants of SIT and demonstrated the validity of its application to religion.
88
Hogg and Terry, Social Identity Processes.
45
Surprisingly, there has not been a great deal of this research. Two articles
published this year point out that religion has held a low profile in the field of social
psychology, and while a great deal of work has been done on gender and race, fewer
studies have focused upon religious identities. 89 The validity of SIT for religion appears
to be assumed. 90 Because of this, the majority of research on religion has been geared
towards tackling real world problems that people face (e.g. immigration, violence,
discrimination.) rather than demonstrating point by point that the tenants of SIT apply to
religion. This means that a review of recent research can seem disjointed at times, as
different situations and groups of people must be brought together under broad principles
of SIT. Thus this chapter will be divided into small sections, under which different
studies will be brought together to illustrate various tenants of SIT.
Categorization
Categorization is the cognitive process that lies behind the group behavior
described by SIT. People categorize both themselves and others. Then, through a process
of depersonalization, they evaluate themselves and others according to the prototypes set
forth by the group. Therefore, if religions establish social identities, then people should
categorize themselves and others according to their religion.
Two papers have demonstrated that this is exactly what people do. The first paper,
published in 2000, examined the process of self-categorization. Through self89
Michael A. Hogg, Janice R. Adelman, and Robert D. Blagg, "Religion in the Face of Uncertainty: An
Uncertainty-Identity Theory Account of Religiousness," Personality and Social Psychology Review 14
(2010): 72-83. and Renate Ysseldyk, Kimberly Matheson, and Hymie Anisman, "Religiosity as Identity:
Toward an Understanding of Religion from a Social Identity Perspective," Personality and Social
Psychology Review 14, no. 1 (2010): 60-71.
90
Christopher Burris and Lynne M. Jackson, "Social Identity and the True Believer: Responses to
Threatened Self-Stereotypes among the Intrinsically Religious," British Journal of Social Psychology 39,
no. 2 (2000): 257-78.
46
categorization people categorize themselves according to their religion and view
themselves as group members rather than as idiosyncratic individuals. This first paper
sought to demonstrate that people do this with religious categories. In the experiment, the
participants first reported their religious commitment. Then, at a later time, the
participants returned and received false feedback that either threatened or bolstered their
religious group membership. They then again reported upon their religious commitment
so that the consequences of the feedback could be measured. The authors of the paper
then compared the results to other studies within SIT that had looked at how people
respond to threats to their social identities.
People that identify weakly with the group will often distance themselves from
the group, whereas people that identify strongly with the group will often increase their
level of self-stereotyping, portraying themselves as an ideal group member. This is
consistent with the self-enhancing nature of group membership, as people either dedicate
themselves more firmly to the group or cut their losses. Because people in this study
responded in the same way as other people had in other studies of social identity, the
authors conclude that religion must be an example of social identity. Thus this paper
demonstrated that people categorize and stereotype themselves according to religious
social identities in the same way that people do with the established social identities of
gender, ethnicity, and nationality. 91
Instead of looking at how people categorize themselves, a paper published in
2007 examined how people use religious affiliation to spontaneously categorize others.
The authors theorized that people likely categorized others according to their religious
affiliation given the social significance of religion. The paper reported upon 3 studies.
91
Burris and Jackson, "Social Identity and the True Believer," 257-78.
47
The studies employed the statement recognition task. In this method, participants are
shown pictures of people having a discussion, with their statements being presented to the
participant. Essentially people watch a slideshow of the discussion. Later people are
required to identify which person said which statement. The mistakes that the participants
make, confusing various individuals, provide information on the way in which that
participant is categorizing the people. This approach is commonly used to measure social
categorization.
Each study supported the proposition that people categorize others according to
religious affiliation. In the first study, participants categorized the people according to
their religious affiliation but not according to a visual alternative (a colored boarder
around the photographs). In the second study, participants categorized people according
to their religious affiliation as well as according to their race. In the third and final study,
participants were provided information about which clubs they belong to, rather than an
explicit declaration of their religious affiliation. As predicted, the participants still
categorized the people according to their religious affiliation. As a result of these studies,
the authors conclude that religion is a prominent social category, similar to race and
sex. 92
Because categorization and depersonalization lie behind social identities, the
findings from these two papers lay the foundation for examining religions with SIT. They
also match what one sees in various religious communities, where people often
categorize themselves and others by their religion and then evaluate them accordingly
(e.g. evangelical attitudes towards Israel as a Jewish nation).
92
Matthew Weeks and Mark A. Vincent, "Using Religious Affiliation to Spontaneously Categorize
Others," International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 17, no. 4 (2007): 317-31.
48
In-group Bias
If people categorize themselves and others according to religious affiliation, SIT
predicts that people will favor their own religious group over those of other people.
Indeed multiple studies have been published that support this hypothesis. A paper
published in 2005 looked at implicit and explicit attitudes towards Christians and
Muslims held by a sample of people from within the United States (most of whom were
Christian). Seeking to examine both implicit and explicit attitudes, the experiment
measured peoples attitudes in two ways. The participants reported their explicit attitudes.
Implicit attitudes were assessed with the Implicit Association Test, in which participants
used a computer to categorize adjectives (pleasant or unpleasant) and names (of
Christians or Muslims). The computer recorded the reaction times of the participants. The
assumption behind the Implicit Association Test is that people process closely related
concepts more quickly then concepts that are more distantly related. For example, most
white people will associate white faces with the category pleasant more quickly than
black faces. This is usually understood as an indication of an implicit level of bias. 93
Consistent with SIT, both the explicit self-reported attitudes and the implicit
attitudes showed an in-group bias favoring Christians. Surprising the correlation between
the explicit and implicit attitudes was only weakly positive, suggesting that the
93
The Implicit Association Test has recently come under some criticism. While it remains widely used to
this day, some have started to question whether it measures true prejudice or something simpler, such as
familiarity or cultural knowledge. A full discussion of the issue would be long and out of place here. As I
see it, the fact that both the explicit and implicit attitudes measured in this study show a bias makes the
issue somewhat moot.
49
relationship between implicit and explicit attitudes is not fully understood yet. 94 The fact
that the people in this study showed an in-group bias based upon religious identification
provides strong evidence that religious identities function and can be examined as social
identities under SIT.
Another paper, published in 2010, also sought to examine in-group bias as it
relates to religion. The paper explored the relationship between religious identification
and ones reaction to aggression from others. The study was conducted in Israel, a place
famous for religious conflict. 217 Jewish and Muslim young men, ages 14 18,
participated in the study. They were asked to respond to 12 different hypothetical
situations. In these situations the participant was to imagine that they were in an isolated
area, confronted with by an aggressive individual. The religion and gender of the
aggressor, as well as the severity of the aggression changed from one scenario to another.
At the lower level, the aggression was described as a light shove, which did not
knock one off his feet and was not painful. This was accompanied by a curse. At the
higher level, it was described as a painful slap accompanied by profuse cursing. The
study found that the participants responses were more moderate towards members of
their same religion than they were towards members of the opposite religion. This fits
with the predictions made by SIT, as the participants are favoring their in-group.
The author points out some of the limitations of the study. For example, by only
interviewing 217 people, the sample size was too small to be declared representational of
the whole population. Additionally, one has to be careful when drawing conclusions from
94
Wade C. Rowatt, Lewis M. Franklin, and Marla Cotton, "Patterns and Personality Correlates of Implicit
and Explicit Attitudes toward Christians and Muslims," Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 44, no.
1 (2005): 29-43.
50
hypothetical situations and using them to predict behavior. 95 Despite these limitations,
this study is a good example of research being conducted that is designed to put SIT to
practical use tackling problems facing various people around the world.
A fascinating paper, published in 2009, sought to examine different social
identities at the same time. The paper publishes the results of two studies that looked at
the in-group bias created by different social identities (e.g. political views, nationality,
religion, kinship). They measured this bias in four different circumstances: giving money
in a dictator game, sharing an office, commuting, and working together. The first study
presented the participants with hypothetical situations and asked them to respond. The
second study was very similar, except that real money was used for the dictator game.
The results of the studies are in line with SIT. People discriminated in favor of their ingroup regardless of which social identity was being addressed. This included religion and
supports the tenet that people form social identities based upon religion.
Additionally, the studies found that people favored the in-group in all of the
hypothetical situations. Finally, the authors were able to compare the levels of bias
between the different social identities and were then able to rank them with one another.
What they found is that family and kinship are the most powerful sources of bias,
followed in descending order by political views, religion, sports-team loyalty, and music
preference. 96 This is one example of the importance that religion holds in peoples lives,
but its significance becomes even more pronounced when one looks at religion in the
ancient world. As will be discussed later in detail, religion and politics in the ancient
95
Zeev Winstok, "The Effect of Social and Situational Factors on the Intended Response to Aggression
among Adolescents," The Journal of Social Psychology 150 (2010): 57-76.
96
Avner Ben-Ner, Brian P. McCall, Massoud Stephane, and Hua Wang, "Identity and in-Group/out-Group
Differentiation in Work and Giving Behaviors: Experimental Evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior &
Organization 72, no. 1 (2009): 153-70.
51
world were often inseparable. Rulers were appointed by the gods and a nations success
militarily and economically was thought to be directly dependant upon the gods. If one
takes the list above and combines the political and religious categories, then one creates a
bias inducing category of identity that is second only to family.
Group Norms and Behavior

Another aspect of social identities is that they establish group norms that guide
the behavior of the individual group members. This is one of the aspects of religion that
people are the most familiar with. Whether a person is commanded to avoid alcohol or to
love their neighbor, such prescriptions and prohibitions are often the focuses of
conversation. Furthermore, in addition to predicting the existence of group norms, SIT
also predicts that the more strongly an individual identifies with a group, the more they
will participate in the group norm.
A paper published in 2010 examined this connection by looking at the Jewish
minority in Poland. The Jewish community in Poland is only a small fragment of what it
once was, as assimilation in the communist era and large waves of emigration have
reduced the population to an estimated five to ten thousand. The authors of the study
wanted to see if strong levels of identification with this community were correlated with
increased participation in the community. They got 150 people to fill out a questionnaire.
Members of the community tended to identify with their minority group, identifying a
little more with their Jewish identity than their Polish identity and perceiving their Jewish
Identity as moderately important to their self-definition. As predicted by SIT, the people
52
who more strongly identified with their community were more involved in the
community. This included religious forms of community participation. 97
Therefore, this study is significant for a couple reasons. First, it provides further
evidence that religious identities function as other social identities under SIT. Second, it
provides an interesting example of a small ethnically and religiously unified group
maintaining their social identity while surrounded by another culture. These
circumstances are similar to those of Jews living in the Roman Empire.
Another paper, published in 2001, examined the power of religion to establish
group norms by looking at attitudes towards abortion among French Catholics. 340
individuals participated in the study. They were asked to read 1 of 8 different scenarios.
The scenarios were presented as interviews with women who had an abortion two months
prior to being interviewed. The participants were then asked to judge the abortion. The
scenarios differed in three different ways. First, some presented the woman as having
been pressured to get an abortion while others presented her as not being pressured.
Second, some scenarios presented her as being Catholic while others made no reference
to her religious social identity. Finally, some presented positive consequences of the
abortion, while others presented negative consequences.
The results of the study supported SIT. Participants with high levels of religious
identification judged the abortions more negatively than those with lower levels of
religious identification. This speaks to ability of religions to establish norms for
acceptable behavior. The stronger the identification with the group, the more devoted the
individual to the groups norms, in this case its prohibition on abortion. In addition to
97
Michal Bilewicz and Adrian Wjcik, "Does Identification Predict Community Involvement? Exploring
Consequences of Social Identitfication Amoung the Jewish Minority in Poland," Journal of Community &
Applied Social Psychology 20 (2010): 72-79.
53
this, participants with low levels of religious identification judged Catholic women more
positively then the women with no religious identification. This reflected a relatively
straight forward in-group bias, as all the participants were catholic, even if they were low
identifiers. Interestingly, participants with a high level of religious identification judged
the Catholic women more harshly than the neutral women. This is interpreted as partial
support for a black-sheep effect. 98
The black-sheep effect refers to the phenomenon by which group members will
judge in-group members more harshly then out-group members who commit the same
offense. At first glance this may seem to contradict SIT and its prediction of an in-group
bias. But when one looks at it in terms of protecting an identity, it fits well with SIT. One
possible explanation is that black-sheep threaten the metacontrast of the group. As
discussed earlier, the metacontrast principle states that groups will minimize the number
of intragroup differences (creating a more consistent and coherent group) and maximize
the number of intergroup differences, attempting to portray the in-group as distinct and
different from other groups. Black-sheep, as in-group members contradicting the norm,
threaten the distinctiveness of the group.
This is interrelated to a desire to portray ones in-group as not just different, but as
better. Because of this, in-group members who do not follow the norms can be severely
judged by other members who see their behavior as a threat to the positive distinctiveness
of the group. In other words, in-group members who engage in negative behavior
undermine the positive group image that other in-group members have developed. 99
98
Laurent Bgue, "Social Judgment of Abortion: A Black-Sheep Effect in a Catholic Sheepfold," The
Journal of Social Psychology 141, no. 5 (2001): 640-49.
99
Amy Lewis and Steven J. Sherman, "Perceived Entitativity and the Black-Sheep Effect: When Will We
Denigrate Negative Ingroup Members?," The Journal of Social Psychology 150, no. 2 (2010): 211-25.
54
Taken all together, this study and the one before it provide good examples of how
religious social identities can establish group norms and guide behavior.
Metacontrast Principle
The next paper, published in 1996, demonstrates the metacontrast principle
mentioned above. The study was conducted in the Netherlands, in Amsterdam. People
living in Amsterdam were asked to fill out a questionnaire. The questionnaire asked
people to estimate the percentage of Christians living in the Netherlands. It then asked
various questions about Christians. Then it asked questions that were designed to assess
the level to which the participant identified as a Christian. Then they were asked about
the religiosity of three relatives and three friends, and then they were asked about their
own religiosity. The results of the study showed that people who identified more strongly
as Christian estimated a lower percentage of the population as being Christian.
These estimations were in turn tied to how the participants defined Christianity.
The high identifiers defined Christianity in more narrow terms than the low identifiers.
Thus their estimations of the Christian population were also lower. 100 The study itself
does not examine why people who more strongly identify with the group define the group
in more narrow terms. But one can speculate that an increased level of group
identification leads to a greater devotion to the metacontrast principle, as seemed to be
the case in the previous study.
100
Willem Bosveld and Willem Koomen, "Estimating Group Size: Effects of Category Membership,
Differential Construal and Selective Exposure," European Journal of Social Psychology 26, no. 4 (1996):
523-35.
55
Threatened Identity
As implied by the last few studies mentioned, people will protect their sense of
identity if they feel it is threatened. This makes sense. Through the processes of selfcategorization and depersonalization, people no longer view themselves as an individual,
to be evaluated as such. Instead they view themselves as group members. Thus, threats
that undermine the value of the group are experienced as threats to the individuals self
worth.
The consequences of this were also seen in the discussion above on superordinate
identities. Studies on the effects of superordinate identities have shown that they can
reduce discrimination and improve relations. On the other hand, they have also
demonstrated the importance of maintaining the distinctness of the subgroups (i.e. the
mutual intergroup differentiation model). This is because threats to the subgroup provoke
discrimination. Religion, as a form of social identity, functions in the same way. This was
already seen in the discussion of categorization at the beginning of this chapter. In that
study, people responded to threats against their religious identity by either increasing
their level of identification, or by distancing themselves from it. In other words, they
either bunkered down and defended it, or cut their losses and distanced themselves from
it. 101
A paper published in 2004 extended this further by examining various visual
religious symbols and the laws that surround them. Specifically the author examined
controversies surrounding religious headgear, hair, and the kirpan, a Sikh ceremonial
dagger. Visible symbols such as these can become powerful aspects of an individuals
religious identity. They are a bold declaration of group membership. They become
101
Burris and Jackson, "Social Identity and the True Believer," 257-78.
56
prototypical. Using them and believing in the values that they represent becomes a vivid
example of what the ideal group member is supposed to do and be.
Because visual symbols are so powerful, they can cause conflict within
communities. The author discusses various examples. One example is the kirpan. The
kirpan is a ceremonial dagger that is worn by faithful Sikh. Sikhism is a religion that
emerged in 15th century India, and its parishioners believing that it is vital to wear the 5
Ks. The 5 Ks are the kesh (uncut hair, usually kept under a turban), the kanga (a wooden
comb), the kachchhera (shorts, usually white), kara (an iron bracelet), and the kirpan.
These adornments are considered necessary for faithful, baptized Sikhs. This caused a stir
in California when this religious practice came into conflict with policies prohibiting any
weapons on school campuses. Sikh children were told that they could not wear a kirpan
to school. This was seen as a threat to their identity. In the orthodox view, to relinquish
ones kirpan is to forsake ones faith. The matter went to court, and in the mid 90s a
compromise was reached.
Another example discussed in the paper pitted French identity against Muslim
Identity. In this instance, Muslim girls attending a public middle school in Creuil, France,
were required to remove their hijab. French officials interpreted the garment as violating
the separation of church and state. They also viewed it as symbolizing the gender
inferiority of women in Islamic society. Finally they viewed it as undermining the
cohesiveness of the French national identity.
Naturally, from the point of view of the Muslim immigrants the hijab is an
important symbol of their religious identity. They do not want to assimilate into French
society if it costs them their religious identity (again, remember the discussion of
57
superordinate identities and subgroups). 102 As these examples demonstrate, as religious
practices become more prototypical, they become central to ones sense of religious
identity. Prohibitions against such practices can then evoke strong responses from the
community. These two examples were oriented in visual religious symbols, but as we
have seen elsewhere (e.g. the abortion study, Burris study) the same thing applies to
other prototypical behavior and beliefs as well.
Self-Enhancement
As discussed previously, self-enhancement is one of the primary motivations
underlying the social identity phenomenon. If this is the case, and if religions form social
identities, then religion should be tied to self-enhancement. Indeed, research has
demonstrated the connection between religious practice and psychological well-being.
Additionally, a paper published in 2007 provided evidence that religious social identities
are the mediating process for this association.
More precisely, the study was examining the connection between more frequent
formal religious participation and psychological well-being as measured by three factors:
more positive affect, less negative affect, and more life satisfaction. The authors
hypothesized that religious social identities mediate this association. The study used data
from the 1995 National Survey of Midlife, conducted in the U.S. In all, 3,032 people
responded to the survey, ranging in age from 25 to 74. Measurements were made of the
respondents formal religious participation, the strength of their religious social identities,
and their psychological well-being. The results of the study supported the original
102
Alison Dundes Renteln, "Visual Religious Symbols and the Law," American Behavioral Scientist 47,
no. 12 (2004): 1573-96.
58
hypothesis. The authors acknowledge that research on the connection between religious
practice and psychological well-being suggests multiple potential explanations. But this
research supports the idea that religious social identities are an additional factor.103
Other studies have taken this general connection and applied it to specific social
situations. For example, a paper published in 1999 looked at African-American
adolescents. It wanted to see if increased commitment to a church community helped the
individuals deal with stigmatization. The study involved a total of 50 Black sophomores
and juniors selected randomly from two different high schools. Each student participated
in an hour long interview. Levels of subjective stigmatization, defined as the degree to
which an individual internalizes negative attitudes and stereotypes, were measured.
Religiosity and racial socialization, which teaches children strategies for coping with
racial discrimination, were also measured.
The study found that individuals with strong commitments to a church were more
destigmatized than those without one. This study was limited in the sense that it did not
examine the underlying mechanisms behind this correlation. 104 Still, it is another
example of how religion is connected to psychological well being. Additionally, if the
results from the previous study are applied to this study, it seems likely that religious
social identities play some role.
A third paper, published in 2002, looked at West African migrants to Britain. It
looked at the role that Pentecostalism plays in the formation and maintenance of social
identities. It has already been shown that religious identities can play an important role in
103
Emily A. Greenfield and Nadine F. Marks, "Religious Social Identity as an Explanatory Factor for
Associations between More Frequent Formal Religious Participation and Psychological Well-Being,"
International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 17, no. 3 (2007): 245-59.
104
Angela G. Brega and Lerita M. Coleman, "Effects of Religiosity and Racial Socialization on Subjective
Stigmatization in African-American Adolescence," Journal of Adolescence 22, no. 2 (1999): 223-42.
59
both immigrant and minority communities. This was seen in the discussion of the Jewish
community in Poland, the Muslim immigrants in France, and the Sikh in California. It is
further supported by this study of West African migrants.
The study is based upon 50 structured interviews with members of the Redeemed
Christian Church of God, the largest church of black Pentecostalism in Britain. The
interviews lasted approximately an hour and supplemented information that was collected
through questionnaires. As was predicted by the author, religion played a key role in
developing and maintaining the social identity of the individuals.
The congregation that the participants came from is typical of the Redeemed
Christian Church of God, in that it was founded by a model parish in Lagos, Nigeria. It
reflects a desire to evangelize to white Europeans. Despite the evangelical goals, the
congregation has won over few white converts and remains a focus of identity and
inspiration for Nigerian migrants. Additionally, its theology and values have adapted to
reflect the needs of the community.
Traditionally, black churches are seen as providing a coping mechanism for
members to deal with their disadvantaged and marginalized social positions. Interviewees
did complain of discrimination and the challenges they faced in British society. In turn,
the church provides a sense of community and identity that helps the parishioners handle
this sense of alienation. This study also showed that the social identity surrounding this
religious community does more than simple help them cope with stress. It also reflects
developments in Nigeria (e.g. evangelizing to white Europeans), and provides its
members with a strong connection to their homeland. 105 This is another example of
105
Stephen Hunt, "'Neither Here nor There': The Construction of Identities and Boundary Maintenance of
West African Pentecostals," Sociology 36, no. 1 (2002): 147-69.
60
religious identities contributing to peoples well being, thus supporting the concept of
self-enhancement found in SIT and the idea that people do form social identities around
religion.
Uncertainty Reduction
The second principle motivation underlying the social identity phenomenon is
uncertainty reduction. Religions, as social identities, seem ideally suited to dealing with
uncertainty. All social groups reduce uncertainty through their group norms and belief
systems. But religions offer epistemological and ontological certainty. 106 In addition to
normative prescriptions for daily life, they address the nature of existence. This makes
them well suited for addressing feelings of uncertainty. 107
Recent research has begun to examine the relationship between religious practice
and feelings of uncertainty. A paper published in 2008 reported upon a study that
examined peoples belief in a non-random world, and how this related to ones belief in a
controlling God. In the study, 47 students were presented with different scenarios
designed to increase their level of anxiety. Half of the scenarios were also designed to
lower the individuals belief in personal control. The authors predicted that belief in a
controlling God would be strengthened when individuals were confronted with an
uncertain and random world. The results of the experiment supported this conclusion,
suggesting that religious social identities can be a powerful tool for dealing with
106
107
Ysseldyk, Matheson, and Anisman, "Religiosity as Identity," 60.

Hogg, Adelman, and Blagg, "Religion in the Face of Uncertainty," 72.
61
uncertainty. 108 This may explain some of the findings mentioned previously, where
immigrants used religious identities to deal with their new found environment.
A second paper, published in 2006, examined how people defend their worldview
in times of uncertainty. The paper reported upon two studies. In the first study, 1,529
people participated in an online survey. Among other things, the survey measured the
participants attitudes towards uncertainty. The participant was also asked to respond to
an antireligious passage. The study found that the more concerned people were with
uncertainty, the more angrily they responded to the antireligious statement.
The second study sought to examine this phenomenon under more controlled
conditions. The second experiment was a laboratory experiment that allowed for greater
control and measurement of peoples reactions. In the second study the strength of the
individuals religious views was assessed. Their uncertainty level was manipulated, and
anger was again provoked in response to antireligious material. As predicted, people who
held strong religious beliefs and for whom uncertainty was made salient reacted more
strongly against the antireligious material. 109 Again, this is strong evidence supporting
the proposition that religions, acting as social identities, can help individuals deal with
uncertainty. This further confirms that the SIT is applicable to religious practice.
Researchers are now starting to extend this further by suggesting that the SIT be
used as one tool for understanding religious fundamentalism and extremism. While
fundamentalism is a complex phenomenon, it is possible that fundamentalism is fueled
108
Kristin Laurin, Aaron C. Kay, and David A. Moscovitch, "On the Belief in God: Towards an
Understanding of the Emotional Substrates of Compensatory Control," Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology 44, no. 6 (2008): 1559-62.
109
Kees van den Bos, Jitse van Ameijde, and Hein van Gorp, "On the Psychology of Religion: The Role of
Personal Uncertainty in Religious Worldview Defense," Basic & Applied Social Psychology 28, no. 4
(2006): 333-41.
62
more by intergroup tensions than by individual psychology. It is also possible that
because religious identities address both earthly and eternal threats they magnify outgroup tensions. 110 Additionally, there is a substantial evidence that fundamentalism is
often associated with societal uncertainty. Fundamentalism is itself a practice in certainty.
Fundamentalist groups often attack those aspects of society that threaten the certainty and
stability of their beliefs (e.g. evolution, biblical criticism). It may be that fundamentalism
is rooted in uncertainty reduction, which is one of the key functions of social identities
and a key concept in SIT. 111
Superordinate Identities
Superordinate identities, as discussed previously, unite different subgroups under
one common identity. Perhaps one of the most common examples of this is when
different people are united under one national identity (i.e. Irish-Americans, AfricanAmericans, and Asian-Americans are all American). A series of papers published in 2007
looked at this phenomenon in relation to Turkish-Dutch Muslims in the Netherlands. The
results of the studies match the previous discussion of superordinate identities.
For one experiment, 104 Turkish-Dutch individuals whose parents were all from
Turkey responded to questions. The questions evaluated their recent experiences in Dutch
society, their level of Turkish identification, and their level of Dutch identification. The
results show that when the Turkish-Dutch Muslims felt rejected by Dutch society they
110
111
Ysseldyk, Matheson, and Anisman, "Religiosity as Identity," 60-71.

Hogg, Adelman, and Blagg, "Religion in the Face of Uncertainty," 72-83.
63
increasingly identified with their ethnic and religious identities. 112 This follows what was
observed earlier. The adoption of superordinate identities is hindered when the
subgroups identity is threatened.
217 Turkish-Dutch individuals participated in a second study that used a
questionnaire to look at their level of national identification as well as their attitudes
towards other religious groups (Christians, Hindustanis, Jews, and non-believers). As
predicted, the results of the study were consistent with previous research on superordinate
identities. An increased level of identification with Dutch nationality did improve
relations with other religious groups that were also Dutch.This was only seen in those
people that identified the most strongly with their Muslim identity. This is consistent with
the mutual intergroup differentiation model. By maintaining a strong Muslim identity,
these participants were able to feel secure in their subgroup, and thus the superordinate
category improved their relationship with religious out-groups. 113 The findings of these
studies further demonstrate the validity of using SIT to study religious groups.
Identity Definition
The definition of groups can be tricky. The boundaries of a group are established
through the groups prototypes and its norms. Just as prototypes and group norms define
group members, by default they also define out-group members. Additionally, prototypes
are not static. They are constantly shifting and at times people actively try to change
them. This can lead to conflict as one prototype can clash with another. At this point in
112
Maykel Verkuyten and Ali Aslan Yildiz, "National (Dis)Identification and Ethnic and Religious
Identity: A Study among Turkish-Dutch Muslims," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 33, no. 10
(2007): 1448-62.
113
Verkuyten, "Religious Group Identification," 341-57.
64
the discussion this work is not interested in the mechanisms behind the change (i.e.
minority and majority influence). Instead, this work is interested in the nature of the
conflict. Through SIT intra-religious conflicts and schisms can be understood as clashes
of identity.
This is seen in the controversy surrounding the ordination of women in the
Church of England. Two papers, one published in 1999 and the other published in 2000,
examined the nature of the conflict. The authors wanted to understand the nature of the
conflict. One of the studies examined the content of videos and booklets produced to
fight against the ordination of women. This material makes it clear that those who are
opposed to ordination feel that the very essence of the Church is being undermined. The
identity of the Church itself is believed to be under attack. 114
The second paper conducted two studies looking at both sides of the debate and
comparing each sides definition of the church. In the first study 15 prominent members
of the Church were interviewed, and in the second 185 activists participated in the study
by filling out questionnaires that examined their conception of the church. The authors of
the study conclude that the participants define the Church differently. People for and
against the ordination of women view the nature of the Church differently. Because of
this, people in favor of the ordination of women naturally see it as affirming the essence
of the Church, while people against the ordination of women see it as undermining the
114
Fabio Sani and Steve Reicher, "Contested Identities and Schisms in Groups: Opposing the Ordination of
Women as Priests in the Church of England," British Journal of Social Psychology 39, no. 1 (2000): 95112.
65
essence of the Church. Finally, opponents of the ordination used the belief that the
essence of the Church has changed to justify the possibility of schism. 115
When these types of conflicts are viewed as struggles over identity, the nature of
the conflict becomes clearer. Struggles over seemingly insignificant doctrinal changes
make sense when viewed in light of SIT. The doctrines are prototypical. They define the
group. Thus such changes have an impact upon the social identity of the group, and are
felt keenly by the in-group members.
Conclusion
This concludes the review of SIT. The purpose of these three chapters is to
provide a solid foundation, upon which the following analysis is based. Chapter one
covered the basic aspects of SIT. Social identities and the groups that they form are
defined by mutual self-construal. In other words, a democrat is a democrat (a social
identity) because they define themselves in the same way (i.e. the same political values,
goals, and beliefs) as other democrats, who go through the same process. By defining
themselves in the same way and by identifying with each other, these people form a
social identity and group.
The cognitive process that lies behind this phenomenon is one of categorization.
Just as individuals categorize everyday objects, they also categorize people. These
categories are very familiar (e.g. Americans, Canadians, whites, African-Americans,
Jews, Christians, etc.). These categories form social identities. When categorizing people,
individuals depersonalize them. They no longer view the people as individuals, but only
115
Fabio Sani and Steve Reicher, "Identity, Argument and Schism: Two Longitudinal Studies of the Split
in the Church of England over the Ordination of Women to the Priesthood," Group Processes & Intergroup
Relations 2, no. 3 (1999): 279-300.
66
as group members. Not only that, but the individuals depersonalize themselves. They
view themselves as a group member, and not as unique human beings. In other words an
American would see himself or herself as an American, not as an individual. Similarly,
they would see another person as a Canadian, not as a unique individual.
By depersonalizing themselves, individuals attach a groups identity to their sense
of self. This leads to individuals evaluating themselves and others according to the groups
that they belong to. The groups status, value, and worth become the individuals status,
value, and worth. In other words, if someone is a Zoroastrian then the reputation that
Zoroastrians have will be internalized by the individual. Thus, self-enhancement is one of
the main motivations behind the adoption of social identities. Similarly, the individual
will apply the reputation of other groups to those group members. The Zoroastrian will
apply the reputation of Christians to a Christian he or she encounters.
This process of mutual self-construal, created by categorization and
depersonalization, creates the complex set of phenomenon that was discussed in chapter
one. It creates a group bias, in which people favor their own group over others (e.g.
racism, sexism, prejudice). It gives rise to the metacontrast principle, which states that
groups will try to minimize the differences between the members and maximize their
differences with other groups. This increases the groups entitativity (i.e. the groups
cohesion, its distinctiveness as a group). This also helps facilitate the in-group bias.
Thus groups want to be distinct, and positively contrasted with other groups. This
is where group prototypes come in. Prototypes are the behaviors and/or ideal group
members that define what it means to be a group member. What would Jesus do? is the
classic example. Jesus is a Christian prototype. He defines what a good group member is.
67
Therefore, all group members are evaluated against his example. The more Christ-like
a person is, the better the Christian. Because prototypes establish the ideal group member,
and are used when comparing ones group to anothers, they often represent the ideals of
the Group. Ideal depictions of the group do a better job of supporting an in-group bias,
entitativity, and the metacontrast principle.
This is a great deal of information to cover, and chapter two attempted to look at
specific issues that will be critical in the analysis of Galatians. It looked at the other
motivational factor behind adopting social identities, uncertainty reduction. Basically
people identify more strongly with groups in the face of uncertainty. Because groups
have clear standards for behavior and social interaction, they function to reduce the
uncertainty that one experiences. This is probably one of the reasons that patriotism
surged after 9/11. People committed more strongly to their social identity (i.e. American)
in the face of an uncertain future.
Chapter two also looked at superordinate identities. Superordinate identities are
identities that encompass other subordinate identities, making a group out of smaller
disjointed groups. In other words, American identity is a superordinate identity that
includes the subordinate identities of Jewish-Americans, Italian-Americans, JapaneseAmericans, etc. Superordinate identities can be powerful tools in helping people get
along, but the research reviewed in chapter two made it clear that this can only happen if
the subordinate identities are not threatened. When threatened, an individual will likely
defend their subordinate identity at the expense of the superordinate identity. For
example, a Jewish-American would not want to give up his or her Jewish identity just for
the sake of being an American.
68
Chapter two concluded by looking at depersonalized social attraction and the
social identity theory of leadership. Depersonalized social attraction refers to the
phenomenon in which people are more socially attracted to prototypical group members.
Think of the good Christians from the example above. The social identity theory of
leadership ties this principle into leadership by pointing out that leaders who are more
socially attractive (i.e. prototypical) are more effective. The catch to all of this is that it is
only true when the groups identity is salient. That is, when it is both prominent and
relevant. The social identity theory of leadership does not apply to leadership situations
based upon personal relationships.
Finally, chapter three reviews current research in the field and shows that SIT and
its predictions apply to modern religions. This is a critical step. If SIT does not apply to
modern religion, then it would be misguided to apply it to ancient religion. Chapter four
will now go ahead and discuss how scholars can take modern theories, such as SIT, and
apply them to the ancient world.
69
Chapter 4: Social Scientific Criticism
Social scientific criticism (SSC) is one approach, among many, to the study of the
NT. Simply put, SSC applies the social sciences to the study of the NT. More precisely:
Social-scientific criticism of the Bible is that phase of the exegetical task
which analyzes the social and cultural dimensions of the text and of its
environmental context through the utilization of the perspectives, theory,
models, and research of the social sciences. 116
It is critical to note that SSC complements and builds upon other methods of biblical
criticism. It is not an isolated approach to the text, and its utilization does not preclude the
use of other methods. Indeed, SSC is intricately related to the other forms of biblical
criticism, such as: textual criticism, literary criticism, historical criticism, form criticism,
redaction criticism, rhetorical criticism, etc. 117
This is particularly apparent in the discussions of historical context and rhetoric
found below. SSC is just one of the tools available for understanding the text, and it is
most effective when used in conjunction with other tools. Each tool has a specific
application and purpose.
Social-scientific criticism, in its turn, studies the text as both a reflection
of and a response to the social and cultural settings in which the text was
produced. Its aim is the determination of the meaning(s) explicit and
implicit in the text, meanings made possible and shaped by the social and
cultural systems inhabited by both authors and intended audiences. 118
Thus, this work is an exercise in SSC in that it seeks to apply SIT to the study of
Galatians. As a study of social behavior and interactions, SIT helps illuminate the
meanings of the text that are dependent upon this social environment. This does not
116
John Hall Elliott, What Is Social-Scientific Criticism?, Guides to Biblical Scholarship. New Testament
Series. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 7.
117
Elliott, Social-Scientific Criticism, 7.
118
70
replace the valuable work that was done before by other scholars, instead it builds upon it
to develop a more complete understanding of Galatians.
History
While the formal practice of SSC emerged in the 1970s, scholars have been
examining the NT with insights from the social sciences for more than one hundred
years. It is worth mentioning a few notable examples. For example, Adolf Deissmann
was an influential German scholar from the early twentieth century, who made important
contributions to the social history of early Christianity. 119 Much of his work focused on
recently discovered papyri and he was interested in what they could tell us about the
social world of Paul and off the NT. 120 Other German scholars, such as Friedrich Engels
and Karl Kautsky, were influenced by Karl Marx and this can be seen in their work. 121
Finally, American interest in the sociology of early Christianity was represented by the
Chicago school. 122 As one of its most prominent members, the work of Shirley Jackson
Case is representative of the school. 123
Despite this early proliferation of research, the study of the social setting of early
Christianity began to decline in the 1920s. This was for a couple reasons. One reason is
that form criticism became more and more detached from the social setting of early
119
David G. Horrell, ed. Social-Scientific Approaches to New Testament Interpretation (Edinburgh: T & T
Clark,1999), 4.
120
Gustav Adolf Deissmann, Paulus: Eine Kultur- und Religions- Geschichtliche Skizze (Tbingen: Mohr,
1911); Gustav Adolf Deissmann, Licht vom Osten (Tbingen: Mohr, 1923); Gustav Adolf Deissmann,
Light from the Ancient East: The New Testament Illustrated by Recently Discovered Texts of the GraecoRoman World (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1927).
121
K. Marx and F. Engels, On Religion (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1957); Karl
Kautsky, Der Ursprung des Christentums. Eine historische Untersuchung (Stuttgart1908); Karl Kautsky,
Foundations of Christianity: A Study in Christian Origins (London: Orbach & Chambers, 1925).
122
Horrell, ed. Social-Scientific Approaches.
123
Shirley Jackson Case, The Social Origins of Christianity (Chicago1923); Shirley Jackson Case, The
Social Triumph of the Ancient Church (New York1933).
71
Christianity. Early use of form criticism tied the text to their use in specific social
situations. In the middle of the twentieth-century form criticism focused more upon the
texts place within the church, rather than its place within the larger social context. It is
also important to note that the interests of Rudolf Bultmann, a prominent practitioner of
form criticism, developed towards a hermeneutic of demythologization and towards
formulating the word of the Gospel in existential terms. 124 Thus his work became
detached from its socio-historical context.125
Another reason for the decline of interest in the social world of early Christianity
can be seen in the influential work of Karl Barth. Barth understood the revealed Word of
God to be radically other. It is entirely disconnected from human endeavor and society.
Thus it is unaffected by human patterns of social and religious behavior. This position
remains antithetical to SSC, which is based upon the assumption that social and historical
contexts shape religion.
This trend started to change in the 1960s. This shift in attitudes is probably
connected to larger cultural shifts taking place at the time. In the United States, the 1960s
saw social unrest and upheaval. This unrest encouraged a new approach to history, an
approach that looked at historical events from the perspective of the people who lived at
the time rather than from the perspective of key leaders and figures. This involves
looking at the social institutions, groups, and settings that people participated in on a
daily basis. This new approach to history was also accompanied by tremendous growth in
the social sciences. New methodologies were introduced and developed as sociology
124
Rudolf Karl Bultmann, Jesus Christ and Mythology (New York: Scribner, 1958); Rudolf Karl
Bultmann, The New Testament and Mythology and Other Basic Writings (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
1984).
125
Horrell, ed. Social-Scientific Approaches, 5.
72
gained more prominence and influence in Universities. When SSC took hold in the
1970s, biblical studies was basically catching up. 126
Because SSC applies the social sciences to the study of the NT, the works of SSC
are as diverse as the social sciences themselves. For this reason, a complete overview of
SSC over the past forty years is both unnecessary and impractical. On the other hand, it is
worth while to look at some of the key works of SSC that helped reestablish its place
within biblical studies. Three of the most prominent names to emerge in this period are
Gerd Theissen, Bruce Malina, and Wayne Meeks.
Theissen got the ball rolling with a series of articles published starting in 1973.
This is not to say that no one had practiced SSC before this, but Theissens articles had an
impact that others lacked, and his work changed the way scholars look at the NT. His first
article planted Jesus firmly in the historical and social context of his day. Theissen used
the sociology of literature to investigate the NT. As he puts it, the sociology of literature
investigates the relations between written texts and human behavior. It studies the social
behavior of the people who make the texts, pass them on, interpret them, and adopt them.
And it analyzes this behavior under two aspects: first, as typical behavior; second, as
contingent behavior behavior conditioned by outside circumstances. 127 He also points
out that the sociology of literature is particularly applicable to NT, as the teachings of
Jesus were originally transmitted orally. A written source can theoretically be passed on
with little consequence for, and little influence from, the surrounding social context (e.g.
dusty library books). On the other hand, the sayings of Jesus were passed down orally,
126
Horrell, ed. Social-Scientific Approaches, 6-7.

Gerd Theissen, "The Wandering Radicals: Light Shed by the Sociology of Literature on the Early
Transmission of Jesus Sayings," in Social-Scientific Approaches to New Testament Interpretation, ed.
David G. Horrell (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1999), 95.
127
73
only to be written down decades after his death. This means that their existence was
dependent upon the people, groups, and social contexts that preserved them. 128
After viewing the NT in the light of the sociology of literature, Theissen
concludes that Jesus was a wandering radical, and that early Christian faith assumed
three social forms: the radicalism of the itinerant charismatics, love patriarchalism, and
gnostic radicalism. 129 As with all scholarship, Theissens work has been critiqued. 130 Its
importance is not in the conclusion that it comes to, but rather the methodology that it
demonstrates. It is an excellent example of SSC as it clearly and directly applies a social
scientific model to the NT. It also firmly plants Jesus and his early followers in their
social and historical context.
He has continued to use the social sciences in his work, the best known of which
is probably Sociology of Early Palestinian Christianity, published in 1978. 131 It became
representative of his style, utilizing social scientific models eclectically in an attempt to
create the most accurate representation of the historical situation. This is in contrast with
other scholars who insist upon the use of one single ridged model. These two approaches
have sparked a debate, which will be seen again in the discussion of Galatians rhetoric.
The second foundational work to be examined is The New Testament World,
published by Bruce Malina in 1981.The work brought insights from cultural
anthropology to the study of the NT. As Malina puts it, the purpose for using
anthropological models in New Testament study is precisely to get to hear the meaning of
the texts in terms of the cultural contexts in which they were originally proclaimed. The
128
Theissen, "The Wandering Radicals," 97.

Theissen, "The Wandering Radicals," 119.
130
For a summary of the primary criticisms see: Horrell, ed. Social-Scientific Approaches, 93-95.
131
Gerd Theissen, Gerd Theissen, and Gerd Theissen, Sociology of Early Palestinian Christianity, 1st
American ed. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1978).
129
74
models chosen for this book are mid-range models in the sense that they serve to explain
segments of behavior rather than the whole cultural picture of the social world of early
Christianity. 132 Thus, as with Theissens work, Malinas work plants the NT firmly in its
social and cultural context. Without this context, it is impossible to understand the
meaning of the text. In order to determine the correct cultural context, Malina turned to
research that examined the modern Mediterranean.
Based upon this research, Malina created a series of values that he believes reflect
the culture of the region at the Jesus time. First is the honor/shame dynamic. Honor
reflects ones standing in society, and when it is challenged it requires a response. Second
is the dyadic personality, in which a person is defined by their relationships to others.
Third is the belief in a limited good, which is the belief that there is not enough wealth to
go around. To gain wealth is to do so at the expense of others. Fourth is the importance of
kinship. Finally, there is the value placed upon purity. 133
Malinas work had a large impact upon NT studies. It highlighted the cultural
differences between modern culture and the culture of the NT world. Additionally, it
explicitly laid out the values that lie behind the biblical text. This allows the reader to
recognize the power and shock value of texts that are now taken for granted. It also
allows for more accurate interpretations of their meaning. A prominent founding
member, Malina and others formed the context group in 1986, formally organizing in
1989. 134 To this day, the group has continued to practice SSC.
132
Bruce J. Malina, The New Testament World : Insights from Cultural Anthropology, 3rd ed. (Louisville,
Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), xiii.
133
Malina, The New Testament World, 54-55, 81-82, 112, 42-43, 81.
134
75
It is worth mentioning some of criticisms that have been brought against Malinas
work. First, Malinas use of modern anthropological models has been questioned. Malina
has not done the work to establish that these modern models apply to the ancient world.
He offers no non-biblical support for these models, something that is critical in order to
avoid circular reasoning. In response to this criticism, he has simply stated that culture
values change very little over time. 135 While this may be true, the fact that Malina takes it
as a given is unsettling.
Additionally, it has been argued that his models homogenize Mediterranean
culture and fail to take into account the diversity of local cultures. 136 Finally he ignores
other forms of criticism in biblical studies. For example, the challenge/response
interaction seen in the gospels between Jesus and his opponents may be due to the literary
structure of the text. It could also be due to relationship between the authors community
and the surrounding communities. It is not clear that it results from the cultural value of
honor. In the end, despite these criticisms Malinas work remains influential. It can be
contrasted with Theissens work, which used an eclectic selection of models, in that
Malinas work utilizes one social scientific approach and applies it directly to the NT.
The final example of early work in SSC is First Urban Christians by Wayne
Meeks. First published in 1983, the work looks at the urban environment and social level
of early Pauline Christians. He describes his work as a social history.
To write social history, it is necessary to pay more attention than has
become customary to the ordinary patterns of life in the immediate
environment within which the Christian movement was born . . . the task
of a social historian of early Christianity is to describe the life of the
135
136
Malina, The New Testament World, xi.

Horrell, ed. Social-Scientific Approaches, 14-15.
76
ordinary Christian within that environment not just the ideas or the selfunderstanding of the leaders and writers. 137
His work reflects the new methods and developments that had taken place within the
social sciences. He focuses his history on the average person, instead of the historical
figure.
Meeks goes on to survey a wide range of issues facing early Christianity. He
looks at the urban environment in which Pauline communities arose. He looks at the
relationship between villages and cities, between cities and the Empire, and between the
countryside and the city. He then looks at the social level of Pauline Christians. He tries
to determine their social and economic status. He concludes that Pauline Christians
actually represents a wide range of social and economic positions. They were not merely
from the bottom of the society. There are slaves, although we cannot tell how many. The
typical Christians, however, the one who most often signals his presence in the letters
by one or another small clue, is the free artisan or small trader. Some even in those
occupational categories had houses, slaves, the ability to travel, and other signs of
wealth. 138 Meeks goes on to cover a wide range of topics, including the formation of the
church, governance, and ritual. His work changed the way that NT scholars viewed early
Christianity. Early Christians could no longer be seen as the unwashed masses. They
came from a diverse background, and reflected a widespread social movement.
It is worth noting that Meeks adopted an eclectic approach to the social sciences.
He took bits and pieces from different social theories and combined them in an attempt to
get a fuller understanding of early Christianity. In his own words:
137
Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians : The Social World of the Apostle Paul, 2nd ed. (New
Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), 2.
138
Meeks, The First Urban Christians, 73.
77
In short, the application of social science in the following chapters is
eclectic. I take my theory piecemeal, as needed, where it fits. This
pragmatic approach will be distasteful to the purist; its effect will be many
rough edges and some inconsistencies. Nevertheless, given the present
state of social theory and the primitive state of its use by students of early
Christianity, eclecticism seems the only honest and cautious way to
proceed. 139
His prediction proved correct. Some scholars did find his eclectic approach distasteful. It
is considered one of the biggest weaknesses of his work. Despite this, his work remains
an important contribution to both SSC and NT scholarship.
Methodological Assumptions
The premise behind SSC criticism, of applying the social sciences to biblical
studies, is deceptively simple. This simple description of SSC hides many assumptions,
upon which the validity and usefulness of SSC is based. The most thorough discussion of
these assumptions can be found in John H. Elliotts monograph What is Social-Scientific
Criticism?. He lays out ten different assumptions that he sees as being behind SSC. These
will be reviewed now, with more attention given to some and with expanded explinations
when necessary.
The first assumption Elliot presents is the belief in the sociology of knowledge.
SSC assumes that all knowledge has a social origin.
This applies to both the knowledge of the interpreter and that of the
authors and groups under examination. Acknowledgment of this fact in no
way eliminates a concern for relative objectivity on the part of the
investigator or efforts to restrain freewheeling subjectivity. But it does
reject the possibility of complete objectivity as an unsustainable myth of
objective consciousness. Total objectivity is illusory. There is no such
thing as immaculate perception. Both interpreters and authors of ancient
139
Meeks, The First Urban Christians, 6.
78
texts have specific temporal, psychological, social, and cultural locations
that affect general perceptions and constructions of reality. 140
Thus, it is important for scholars to be aware of their own motives, goals, and
perspectives. Additionally, this assumption makes it impossible to separate the ancient
author from his social and historical context. If all ideas and knowledge have a social
genesis, then it is impossible to understand them without a full understanding and
appreciation for the social context in which they arose. This can be contrasted with
thinkers such as Barth, briefly mentioned above, who viewed the revealed Word of God
as something separated from human endeavor.
The second assumption discussed by Elliot is the distinction between emic and
etic points of view. The terms emic and etic were taken from the field of cultural
anthropology and adopted by biblical scholars who practice SSC. Simply put, emic refers
to the situation as the original authors or community members understood it. Etic refers
to the situation as understood by modern scholars. More precisely:
Emic descriptions and explanations are those given by the natives
themselves from their experience and point of view. They describe what
and how the natives thought but not why they thought so rather than
otherwise. Etic constructs, by employing cross-cultural comparison and by
taking into account a full range of factors not mentioned or considered in
native reports, attempt to explain how native concepts and perceptions
correlate with and are influenced by a full range of material, social, and
cognitive factors. They seek to explain why the native thought and
behaved so and not otherwiseThus in the biblical world the cause of
illness is often traced to demon possession or disrupted social relations (an
emic account), whereas moderns would regard illness as disease possibly
attributable to bacterial infection and/or poor sanitation or the like (an etic
view). 141
140
141

79
This distinction is useful for a couple of reasons. First, it provides a clear way to
distinguish between the views of the researcher and the views of the researched. Second,
it also allows us to distinguish between different types of biblical research.
This work is an etic endeavor. It applies a modern conceptual framework (SIT) to
the historical situation. It is focused primarily on the social and cognitive factors of the
situation, or as Elliot puts it, the why of the situation. Other people focus their work on
the emic perspective, on understanding the perspective of the people being studied. For
example, take the discussion of the law found below. Many people strive to understand
how Paul viewed the law. But this work is less interested in Pauls understanding of the
law (the emic perspective) than in the role that the law played as a set of prototypical
guidelines that defined the Jewish social identity (an etic perspective).
The third assumption that Elliot discusses is the need for models. This assumption
stems from the previous two. Because scholars are fundamentally rooted and constrained
by their historical and social context, there is an unavoidable divide between emic and
etic perspectives. When left unexamined, this divide can prove problematic, leading to
anachronistic and inappropriate conclusions. Models can illuminate this divide, clarify
the position of the scholar, and even help us to understand the emic perspective of the
authors.
There is a second, more straightforward argument in favor of models. It is
impossible to not use them, so they might as well be explicit. For example, one could
argue that 1 Timothy is a relatively late letter, given that it is so concerned with the
organizational structure of the church (e.g. 1 Tim 3). While this argument may appear to
be based upon common sense, it is actually based upon implicit assumptions about the
80
routinization of charisma, in which organizational features of a movement immerge after
the original charismatic leaders have died. Therefore, it is better to make these models
explicit.
This allows for greater clarity and better dialogue between scholars, particularly
those who disagree with one another. Elliot summarizes the purpose of models well.
In the case of social phenomena, models serve as cognitive maps for
observing, categorizing, comparing, and synthesizing elements of social
data and drawing generalizations and conclusions about their salient,
recurrent social features. They provide the means for seeking, analyzing,
and explaining repeated behaviors, social roles, institutions, patters of
stratification, modes of social interaction and conflict, and correlations
between beliefs and behavior, social organization, and worldviews. 142
I think that these first three assumptions, the sociology of knowledge, the emic/etic
distinction, and the necessity of models, are the most critical. In order to avoid spending
to much time here, I will cover the remaining assumptions mentioned by Elliot in less
detail.
The fourth assumption mentioned by Elliot is the process of abduction. Abduction
is a line of reasoning that moves back and forth from the model to the evidence in order
to refine ones understanding. 143 This is natural, given that no one creates a model
without first looking at the available evidence, and it is impossible to examine the
evidence without some sort of model already in place. They are intertwined.
The fifth assumption that Elliot mentions is that models must be derived from the
appropriate social context. 144 While Elliot is specifically referring to the process of
basing models on data from the ancient Mediterranean, I would expand this a little by
saying that models must be verified by data from the appropriate social context. For
142

144
143
81
example, almost no social scientific models are derived directly from data on the ancient
Mediterranean, but they may still be applicable if they are found to be consistent with the
appropriate data.
The sixth assumption is that language is dependent upon the shared social and
cultural systems of those trying to communicate. Words in and of themselves carry no
meaning. It is a shared framework of understanding that lets people communicate.
Biblical texts, like all texts oral or written, presuppose and encode
information regarding the social and cultural systems in which they were
produced and in which they made sense. Both the meanings
communicated by the author(s) of these texts to their intended hearers or
readers and the texts persuasive power are determined by the social and
cultural systems that author(s) and audiences inhabited and that enabled
meaningful communication in the first place. 145
This is seen in everyday experience through miscommunications. Miscommunications
occur precisely because there is not an objective meaning to words, but instead a relevant
social and cultural context that can vary from person to person. This also means that any
study must be firmly rooted in the appropriate social, cultural, and historical context,
because this is the only way to accurately understand the meaning of the text.
The seventh assumption is that SSC is closely related to historical criticism.
While historical criticism focuses on extraordinary individuals and events, SSC
complements this by focusing on social groups and regular patterns of behavior,
providing the social and cultural context for these extraordinary events. As Elliot
describes it:
Practitioners of social-scientific criticism presume that this method is
different from but complementary to a historical orientation. The latter
tends to focus on individual or exceptional actors, extraordinary or
unusual actions, independent or distinctive properties, personal rather than
societal relationships, and diachronic movement and change. These are
145
82
always important foci of investigation, but such distinctive properties can
be perceived only when common and regular features of social life are
first known. This latter concern is the focus of social-scientific inquiry.
Such research tends to focus on social groupings and collectivities; regular
recurrent, routinized behavior; common and typical properties; social and
systemic relations; institutionalized and structured patterns of behavior
and relationships; and synchronic structures and process. 146
Therefore, SSC and works extremely well with a historical orientation.
The eighth assumption is that religion in the ancient world was closely tied to the
institutions of kinship and politics. Thus, the only way to fully understand the religion of
the ancient world is to also look at its social and cultural setting in these institutions. 147
The ninth assumption states that SSC requires a detailed knowledge of the social
scientific model being used. It is important to have a clear understanding of the model
being used, in order to use it correctly and appropriately. 148
Finally, the tenth assumption stresses the importance of knowing the social and
cultural differences that separate our time from theirs. SSC presupposes that awareness
of such differences is essential in order to avoid an anachronistic and ethnocentric
misreading and misappropriation of the Bible. 149 These assumptions provide a good
starting point for any application of SSC. It is interesting to note how these assumptions,
and Elliots selection of them, have been influenced by SSCs place in history.
SITs Applicability to the New Testament

It is important to look at the weaknesses and limitations of SIT and at their
implications for applying SIT to the New Testament. One important limitation of SIT is
146

148
149
147
83
its inability to explain individual differences in intergroup behavior. The internalization
of group membership and the vilification of out-group members vary in degree from
individual to individual. For example, research shows different levels of racism in whites,
sexism in men, and anti-Semitism in non-Jews. 150 Additionally, individuals that tend to
discriminate against one out-group, discriminate against others.
This variation in individual behavior is also seen in individuals attitudes towards
the in-group. Whether social identities are religious, ethnic, or class based, they are
increasingly a matter of choice. This element of choice leads to variation, with some
individuals choosing to identify more strongly then others with a particular group.
Although this is seen in voluntary organizations (e.g. religious communities, political
parties, etc.), it is also seen in groups often defined by fixed characteristics such as race
and ethnicity. 151
SIT has devoted very little attention to the development of these differences. The
widespread use of the experimental minimal-group situation, in which individuals are
assigned group membership but its internalization is rarely measured, makes it difficult to
study individual variations. 152 SIT is certainly limited in its ability to look at variation on
the individual level. But this is not surprising given that SIT was developed out of the
150
On racism see J. F. Dovidio and S. L. Gaertner, "Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism: Historical
Trends and Contemporary Approaches," in Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism, ed. J. F. Dovidio and S.
L. Gaertner (Orlando: Academic Press, 1986), 1-34. On sexism see P. Glick and S. T. Fiske, "The
Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sexism," Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 70 (1996): 491-512. See also J. Swim, K. J. Aikin, W. S. Hall, and B. A. Hunter,
"Sexism and Racism: Old-Fashioned and Modern Prejudices," Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 68 (1995): 199-214. Finally, on anti-Semitism see T. W. Smith, "Actual Trends or
Measurement Artifacts? A Review of Three Studies of Anti-Semitism; the Polls - a Review " Public
Opinion Quarterly 57 (1993): 380-93.
151
Leonie Huddy, "Contrasting Theoretical Approaches to Intergroup Relations," Political Psychology 25,
no. 6 (2004): 950.
152
Huddy, "Contrasting Theoretical Approaches," 954.
84
view that collective phenomena cannot be adequately explained solely by examining
individual processes and the interactions between individuals. 153
Indeed, this is why SIT fits well with the historical study of the NT. With rare
exception, the specific activities and behaviors of individuals within the NT communities
are lost to the modern researcher. Even when individuals are mentioned, they are often
depersonalized and representative of group prototypes. As a result, the NT readily
provides depictions of communities, social groups, and their interactions with one
another. This fits well with SITs strengths, and means that SITs lack of applicability to
individual variation is not a problem.
A careful distinction must be made between SITs lack of explanatory power for
variation between individuals and SITs predictions concerning the behavior of
individuals. For example, were one to look at the converts to early Christianity and try to
determine why one individual converted and another did not, SIT would have little to
contribute. Of course the NT does not have the information required for such a detailed
examination of individual conversion. In contrast, were one to look at social groups, there
relationships with one another, and how this influenced the behavior of key individuals,
SIT would be able to contribute a great deal. Indeed, the NT lends itself to the latter
approach, fitting well with SIT.
Social Scientific Criticism and SIT

The SIT has found a home within NT studies. While not the most common
approach, it is one that is gaining popularity. It is worth looking at a few examples of
research applying SIT to the NT. The first example is a paper published by Jason
153
85
Lamoreaux in 2008. His work looks at the conversion story of Paul found in Acts in light
of the anthropology of ritual and SIT. He understands Pauls conversion experience to be
a shift in social identity, from Judean zealot to a member of the Jesus group.
Arguably, conversion by definition includes a shift in social identity; but
Lamoreaux goes further, incorporating research from the anthropology of ritual.
Anthropology of ritual examines how rituals facilitate the inclusion of new group
members and allow for the breaking of old group boundaries. He sees these two theories
expressed together in the conversion story of Paul. He concludes that Luke utilizes
common ritual structures and altered states of consciousness to legitimate Gentile
inclusion through the character of Saul. Sauls recruitment to the Jesus group is
punctuated by baptism, a rite that signals the breaking into a new community
(aggregation) and the change of personal as well as social identity. 154
The second example is an article written by Raimo Hakola in 2009. In the article
Hakola looks at the character of Nicodemus from the Gospel of John. Hakola starts by
establishing the ambiguous nature of the character in the Gospel of John. Some of the
portrayals are rather negative, while some of the portrayals are more positive.
Interestingly, Hakola argues that this ambiguity allowed the character of Nicodemus to
serve a critical role in maintaining the social identity of the Johannine community. As a
Jew and a Pharisee whose faith is not quite enough despite his positive response to Jesus,
Nicodemus may have allowed the Johannine group to come to terms with Jewish groups
and individuals whose response to early Christians and Jesus was, at least to some extent,
154
Jason T. Lamoreaux, "Social Identity, Boundary Breaking, and Ritual: Saul's Recruitment on the Road
to Damascus," Biblical Theology Bulletin 38, no. 3 (2008): 132.
86
positive. 155 Hakola argues that this was necessary because any positive interaction with
non-believers would undermine the stark dualism of the Gospel, represented by light and
darkness, faith and unbelief. Thus, Nicodemus helps maintain the social identity of the
group by providing a category for people who undermine the group defining dualism of
Johns gospel.
The third example is an article written by Bernard Ukwuegbu in 2008. His article
examines Galatians 5:13-6:10 in light of SIT. The passage describes the proper life and
behavior of a follower of Jesus. Ukweugbu agrees with the traditional interpretation of
this passage, which views it as a paraenetic discourse, whose purpose is to provide rules
and regulations for ethical living. Additionally, he argues that this passage also serves a
second role. When viewed in light of SIT, this passage can be seen as helping to establish
a new social identity for the members of the community. In his view, the paraenetic
instructions are identity-defining norms. He concludes, The paraenetic exhortations of
Galatians (5:13-6:10), rather than being an appendix or a footnote to the primary
theological concerns of the letter, serve as the zenith of Paul's argument, and as part and
parcel of the singular matter that Paul has been addressing all along: the corporate
identity of the Christian community. 156 Below, this work expands his approach by tying
the section into Pauls view and manipulation of the law.
The last scholar to be examined is Philip Esler. Esler has done more work with the
SIT and the NT than any other scholar and was one of the first to do so. Because of this, I
will examine a few of his works. Thus, the fourth example of the application of SIT to the
155
Raimo Hakola, "The Burden of Ambiguity: Nicodemus and the Social Identity of the Johannine
Christians," New Testament Studies 55, no. 4 (2009): 454.
156
Bernard O. Ukwuegbu, "Paraenesis, Identity-Defining Norms, or Both? Galatians 5:13-6:10 in the Light
of Social Identity Theory," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 70, no. 3 (2008): 559.
87
NT is an article written by Esler in 2000. In this article, Esler looks at the parable of the
Good Samaritan in light of SIT. He describes the violent intergroup relationship between
Judeans and Samaritans. He then goes on to argue that this parable is designed to subvert
the connection between the Judean sense of identity and the mosaic law. This is done in
order to promote a new approach to moral behavior. He then compares this approach to
three others designed to reduce intergroup conflict (crossed categorization,
recategorization, and decategorization). Finally he concludes that the parable is relevant
to modern attempts to reduce intergroup conflict. 157 This relatively early article is an
important step towards examining social identities within the NT.
The fifth example is another article written by Esler in 2003. In this article he
turns his attention towards Paul, particularly Romans chapters 12-15. Esler finds the
traditional characterization of the passage as ethics or paraenesis inadequate. He observes
that the concept of ethics applied to the NT is often anachronistic and out of place. He
also questions the appropriateness and usefulness of categorizing the text as
paraenesis. 158 He then applies the SIT and attempts to place the text within its proper
context, concluding that, this part of the letter can be interpreted both as Pauls attempt
to outline descriptors of the new identity his addressees experience as members of the
Christ-movement, especially in relation to agap, and as a vision of the moral life very
similar to the Aristoielian interest in the virtues as the means to promote human
flourishing. 159
157
Philip Francis Esler, "Jesus and the Reduction of Intergroup Conflict: The Parable of the Good
Samaritan in the Light of Social Identity Theory," Biblical Interpretation 8, no. 4 (2000): 352.
158
Philip Francis Esler, "Social Identity, the Virtues, and the Good Life: A New Approach to Romans 12:115:13," Biblical Theology Bulletin 33, no. 2 (2003): 52-53.
159
Esler, "Social Identity," 51.
88
The final example of SIT in NT studies is Galatians, written by Philip Esler in
1998. In this monograph, Esler applies SIT to the book of Galatians. This is essentially
what I am trying to do, so it is critically important to look at what Esler has written, and
how I am both building upon what he has done and taking it in a new direction.
My work here differs from Eslers in at least three significant ways. First, I am
incorporating recent developments within SIT that were unavailable when Esler wrote his
work, particularly uncertainty-identity theory and the social identity theory of leadership.
Second, my work seeks to apply SIT to the text in a more specific and concrete way,
applying specific principles (e.g. prototypicality, metacontrast principle, social attraction)
to specific verses within Galatians. While Esler does some of this, he uses the SIT more
to establish social context of the letter. I attribute this difference simply to the different
nature of our works. As a dissertation, this work is naturally narrower and deeper, more
specifically focused on the details. On the other hand, Eslers work is geared towards a
wider audience and less technical in nature.
Third, Esler views the situation in Galatia as an intergroup conflict, with distinct
groups competing with one another for members. 160 I view it as an intragroup struggle
over the groups identity. This is a profound distinction, which leads each work in a
different direction. Each approach has its own advantages. For example, Eslers
perspective helps one understand the ways in which Paul portrays his community as
better than the surrounding Jewish communities, an intergroup issue. On the other hand,
my perspective helps explain how Pauls discussion of Abraham shifts the groups
prototype and thus affects who is an acceptable group member.
160
Philip Francis Esler, Galatians, New Testament Readings. (London ; New York: Routledge, 1998), 42.
89
This ambiguity, as to the definition and demarcation of groups, is not unique to
the NT. It can be seen above in the studies that looked at the ordination of women in the
Anglican Church, where a case was made that the different sides belonged to
psychologically different groups despite belonging to the same official organization. It
can also be seen in discussions of superordinate identities, where an individuals group
boundaries change depending upon which identity is salient.
In summary, I find three primary distinctions between our works. First, this work
incorporates recent developments in SIT that were unavailable to Esler. Second, this
work is more narrowly and technically focused, given that it is a dissertation. Third, this
work examines the situation in Galatia as an intragroup conflict, while Esler examines it
as an intergroup conflict.
A brief summary of Eslers book is in order. In the first chapter, Esler establishes
his methodological approach to the text. He stresses the importance of recognizing the
large cultural gap that separates us from Galatia. In relation to this he discusses
communication, intercultural communication, and post modernism.
In sum, my preference remains with a strong historical emphasis, while
eschewing the sterilities of historicism and biblicism by accepting the
need for greater self-reflexivity and the production of results through
intercultural dialogue more capable of enriching contemporary Christian
(and non-Christian) life and theology than has traditionally been the case. I
certainly do not pretend that my work is value free and write with the aim
that the reading of Galatians offered here will be capable of feeding into
contemporary liberative discourses. 161
He recognizes the challenges posed by the cultural gap and postmodernism, but still
chooses a historical approach to the text, thinking that some construals of the biblical
world are more plausible then others.
161
Esler, Galatians, 28.
90
In the second chapter, Esler explains SIT and also lays out his understanding of
the situation in Galatia. He briefly describes the historical context of Galatia and the
general issues facing the congregation, such as pressure to adopt the Mosaic Law and to
be circumcised. Then, while he explains SIT, he presents his understanding of the
situation. For Esler, Paul is concerned with maintaining the distinctive identity of his
congregations in relation to the Israelite and Gentile outgroups. 162 Paul does this by
developing the evaluative dimension through drawing out the positive aspects of
belonging to the ingroup which accepts his version of the gospel as compared with the
negatively evaluated outgroups. 163 As mentioned above, this approach differs from mine
which sees the situation as an intragroup conflict.
In the third chapter, Esler reviews the history of scholarship which examines
Galatians as a work of rhetoric. He then ties this discussion into a look at the historical
context of Israelites in the Roman Empire and the rhetoric that they used to maintain their
social identity. He then argues that Paul created a third group when he founded the
church in Galatia, Israelite and Gentile Christ-followers. He views Pauls primary
purpose as reinforcing the group boundary between the followers of Christ and the
Israelites. 164
In chapter four, he brilliantly lays out the case for the problem of mixed-table
fellowship and argues that it was at the root of the conflict in Galatia. In conclusion Esler
writes:
Accordingly, I stand by my 1987 case for the existence of a prohibition
against Israelites engaging in table-fellowship with Gentiles of a kind
which involved the passing around between those present of bread and
162

164
Esler, Galatians, 88-91.
163
91
wine. One plausible reason for this was that it risked the commission of
idolatry in breach of biblical commandments. That is to say, we are not
just dealing with a concern for the effects of too much fraternization, but
with what was perceived to be a direct breach of the Torah. 165
I agree with his position and examine it in the next chapter.
In the fifth chapter, Esler discusses Paul, Jerusalem, and the Antioch incident.
Again, this is something I examine in detail in the next chapter. In chapter six, Esler
proposes that Paul is establishing an identity of righteousness. As he puts it, Pauls aim
in this letter regarding righteousness was to sever it from the competing Israelite
outgroup where it had hitherto lodged as a most positive feature of their social identity
and to claim it for his own congregations. 166
In chapter 7, Esler views Pauls discussion of the law in a similar manner, by
seeing it as a struggle to establish a positive social identity for his congregations in the
context of conflict with the Israelite outgroup who were naturally determined to maintain
the integrity of their ethnic boundaries. 167
In the final chapter, number eight, Esler examines how Paul uses the concepts of
freedom and the spirit in order to create a sense of identity and order life within the
community. Overall, Eslers book is impressive, thoroughly researched, and well
reasoned. In the coming chapters I reference his work in greater detail, both to build upon
the research that he has done and to establish my own position on key issues.
165

167
166
92
Chapter 5: Historical and Social Context

The situation in the community of Galatia was complex. It was a community with
multiple ethnic, religious, and national backgrounds. One way to unravel this complexity
is by looking at the historical context of the situation and by seeing how historical
developments influenced the way people saw the world and interacted with it. The lives
of Jews as emigrants in minority communities throughout the Roman Empire, along with
the political unrest and discontent found in Israel, created a situation in which Jews
struggled to maintain their identity.
The first part of this chapter uses SIT to look at the political unrest that
surrounded Jerusalem for hundreds of years. By using SIT to look at various rebellions
that occurred over the years, one can identify key aspects of Jewish identity that serve as
boundary markers, separating them from other groups. Additionally, this survey of
Jewish rebellions demonstrates that Jerusalem was often the center of political and social
unrest. According to uncertainty-identity theory, the uncertainty created by this unrest
could have been a contributing factor to the situation in Galatia. The uncertainty in
Jerusalem would have made some people more sensitive to threats that undermined their
Jewish identity. They would have been motivated to defend their Jewish identity in order
to reduce uncertainty.
This should not be misconstrued as a cause of the situation in Galatia. It is merely
a contributing factor. The immediate cause was the threat to identity posed by mixed
table fellowship, which was seen in Antioch (as recorded in Galatians) and then again in
93
the events leading up to the crisis in Galatia. The uncertainty in Jerusalem likely
exacerbated the problem, but it did not cause it.
To take a modern example, tensions between the rural communities in the South
and the urban communities in the North contributed to the American Civil War. These
tensions (created by different lifestyles and values) helped to fuel the war, but they were
not the immediate cause (e.g. slavery, states rights). These same tensions also
contributed to the rise of the Tea Party movement over one hundred years later. Again,
they were not an immediate cause, but merely a contributing circumstance.
Similarly, Jerusalem was in social upheaval for hundreds of years. The
uncertainty created by this upheaval contributed to many different social movements, but
was not the immediate cause. The persistence of social upheaval for hundreds of years
does not render that upheaval inconsequential, but at the same time it does speak to
secondary role that it plays. It is a contributing factor, not the immediate cause of the
situation in Galatia.
The second part of this chapter looks at the immediate circumstances surrounding
Galatians, such as its authorship, date, and the reason for its composition. Pauls
opponents were probably Jewish followers of Jesus. Additionally, Jerusalem and the
authority there were probably a significant part of their religious identity. As a dispute
emerged surrounding mixed-table fellowship, Pauls opponents insisted on upholding the
law and its traditional practices. The uncertainty-identity theory predicts that the social
unrest in Jerusalem, and the uncertainty that it created, would have made them sensitive
to threats that undermined their Jewish Identity. They would have been motivated to
94
identify more strongly with their Jewish identity in an attempt to reduce this uncertainty.
This uncertainty did not cause the dispute in Galatia, but likely fed into it.
Maccabean Revolt
The first revolt to be discussed is the Maccabean Revolt (167 B.C.E. 160
B.C.E.). In the Maccabean Revolt, Jews rose up against the Seleucid Empire. The
Seleucid Empire was established after the death of Alexander the Great. Upon his death,
his empire split between his generals. One of the divisions became the Seleucid Empire
and included the land of Judea.
The revolt was sparked when Antiochus IV Epiphanes, ruler of the Seleucid
Empire, attempted to Hellenize Judea. While detailed accounts are given of the people
involved, this work is more concerned with the actions that lead to the revolt.
Specifically, Antiochuss decrees undermined the prototypical behavior of the Jewish
people. This caused them to feel threatened and they revolted.
For example, the identity defining practice of circumcision was undermined, as
recorded in 1 Maccabees:
They went to the king, and he gave them authority to introduce the
customs of the Gentiles. And they built a gymnasium in Jerusalem
according to the manner of the Gentiles. They also submitted themselves
to uncircumcision, and repudiated the holy covenant; yea, they joined
themselves to the Gentiles, and sold themselves to do evil. (1 Macc 1:1315) 168
This prohibition was accompanied by a general effort to eliminate Jewish practice. In
addition to circumcision, it eliminated dietary laws along with Jewish regulations
concerning idolatry and restriction of worship to the temple.
168
W. O. E. Oesterley, "1 Maccabees," in Apocrypha of the Old Testament, ed. R. H. Charles (Bellingham:
Logos Research Systems, 2004).
95
That they should (moreover) build high places, and sacred groves, and
shrines for idols, and that they should sacrifice swine and (other) unclean
animals; and that they should leave their sons uncircumcized, and make
themselves abominable by means of (practicing) everything that was
unclean and profane, so that they might forget the Law, and change all the
(traditional) ordinances. And whosoever should not act according to the
word of the king, should die. (1 Macc 1:47-50) 169
Finally, it prohibited Jewish worship in the temple. Copies of the Jewish Scriptures were
reportedly burned, and a new altar was established in the temple.
And on the fifteenth day of Chislev in the one hundred and forty-fifth year
they set up upon the altar an abomination of desolation, and in the cities
of Judah on every side they established high-places; and they offered
sacrifice at the doors of the houses and in the streets. And the books of the
Law which they found they rent in pieces, and burned them in the fire.
And with whomsoever was found a book of the covenant, and if he was
(found) consenting unto the Law, such an one was, according to the kings
sentence, condemned to death. (1 Macc 1:55-57) 170
The text here is unclear, but the abomination of desolation may have referred to an altar
dedicated to Zeus (see 2 Macc 6:1-2).
The Jews were outraged. They went to arms and fought against the Seleucid
authorities. They eventually won their independence and established the Hasmonean
dynasty, which lasted for approximately 100 years, until Judea came under Roman rule.
More importantly, the Maccabean Revolt demonstrates the central role that
prototypical behaviors and beliefs can play in peoples lives. The central values here (i.e.
circumcision, temple worship, dietary restrictions) remained important for hundreds of
years and are the same ones involved in the Bar Kokhba Revolt nearly 300 years later. It
is also no coincidence that the same issues of circumcision and dietary restrictions are at
issue in Galatia, some 200 years later. Therefore, while the Maccabean Revolt predates
169
170
Oesterley, "1 Maccabees."

96
both the crisis in Galatia and the other revolts discussed here by many years, it is
important in that it clearly frames the issues at stake for the Jewish people. They revolted
in order to preserve their way of life, defending prototypical behaviors that they saw a
central to their identity. It also explains why Jews fought against Greeks around the
Roman Empire (e.g. during the First Jewish-Roman War).
Quiriniuss Census
The second revolt under examination is the uprising against Quiriniuss census,
around 6 C.E. At this time Quirinius was the governor of Syria, and Coponius was the
procurator of Judea. Although Coponius ruled Judea, Judea was part of the province of
Syria. Thus it was actually Quirinius who ordered the census, which was done for
taxation.
This caused resentment among the Jews, as it brought home the fact that they
were now subjected to foreign rule. 171 While the revolt itself was relatively small, it is
important for two main reasons. First, it illustrates the civil unrest that built up for years,
culminating in the First Jewish-Roman War and the destruction of the temple. Second, it
is, at least ideologically, the birth place of the zealots.
The zealots believed in using armed resistance to gain their independence from
Rome. Josephus mentions them frequently, and it is from him that we get our best
accounts of the revolt. Josephus says that many people submitted to the census
peacefully, but some resisted.
But a certain Judas, a Gaulanite from a city named Gamala, who had
enlisted the aid of Saddok, a Pharisee, threw himself into the cause of
rebellion. They said that the assessment carried with it a status amounting
171
W. O. E. Oesterley, A History of Israel, vol. 2 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1951), 386.
97
to downright slavery, no less, and appealed to the nation to make a bid for
independenceSome were slain in civil strife, for these men madly had
recourse to butchery of each other and of themselves from a longing not to
be outdone by their opponents; others were slain by the enemy in war.
Then came famine, reserved to exhibit the last degree of shamelessness,
followed by the storming and razing of cities until at last the very temple
of God was ravaged by the enemys fire through this revolt. (Ant. 18 1.1.410) 172
As seen here, Josephus credits Sadduc (sometimes spelled Zadok) the Pharisee and Judas
of Galilee with starting the movement, which he sees as culminating in the temples
destruction. 173
He goes on to describe this group as the fourth sect of Judaism. It is important to
note that he does not actually call this group zealots. He specifically talks about the
zealots in relation to the First Jewish-Roman War. The similar language used to describe
each group, and the culmination of the above passage, in which he blames them for the
destruction of the temple, suggests that the groups are one and the same. It may be that
the people did not formally call themselves zealots until the war. By the time of the war,
they had adopted the name. This is seen in this passage that describes the political turmoil
in Judea during the first war.
Their efforts were supported by the most eminent of the high priests,
Jesus, son of Gamalas, and Ananus, son of Ananus, who at their meetings
vehemently upbraided the people for their apathy and incited them against
the Zealots; for so these miscreants called themselves, as though they were
zealous in the cause of virtue and not for vice in its basest and most
extravagant form. (J.W. 4 3.9.160-161) 174
172
Josephus: Jewish Antiquities Books XVIII - XIX, trans. Louis H. Feldman, LCL (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 2000).
173
Judas is referred to as a Gaulanite only once, here in this passage, everywhere else in Josephus work he
is referred to as Judas of Galilee.
174
Josephus: The Jewish War Books III-IV, trans. H. St. J. Thackeray, LCL (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1997).
98
Whether or not the participants in the revolt against Quiriniuss census called themselves
zealots, they were the ideological forerunners of the zealots in the First Jewish-Roman
War.
They represent an ideological opposition to the Romans that would span decades.
There revolt was even mentioned in Acts 5:36-37, along with one led by Theudas that
took place around 45 C.E. 175 While the revolt against Quiriniuss census was short, it set
a dangerous precedent, and sowed the seeds for the First Jewish-Roman War. 176 This is
important because it demonstrates that these revolts are not isolated historical events.
Each is connected to the cultural and historical setting in which it arose. These cultural
attitudes, which embodied in-group/out-group divisions, lasted for many years.
The First Jewish-Roman War

The next conflict to be discussed is the First Jewish-Roman War. The war began
in 66 C.E. and lasted until the fall of Masada in 73 C.E. This revolt played a critical role
in history. It resulted in a siege on Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in 70 C.E.,
an event that had a dramatic impact upon the development of both Christianity and
Judaism. The revolt started 10-15 years after the writing of Galatians. Thus, the wars
consequences could not influence the attitudes of the people involved in Galatia. On the
other hand, the war is significant in that it demonstrates the civil and political unrest
found within Jerusalem.
175
Luke seems to have reversed the chronological order of the events. See Loveday Alexander, "Acts," in
The Oxford Bible Commentary, ed. John Barton and John Muddiman (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2001), 1033-34.
176
Oesterley, History, 386.
99
The issues leading up to the revolt are complex, and written about extensively by
Josephus (c. 37100 C.E.).
Another incident occurred at the same time in the Temple. Eleazar, son of
Ananias the high-priest, a very daring youth, then holding the position of
captian, persuaded those who officiated in the Temple services to accept
no gift or sacrifice from a foreigner. This action laid the foundation of the
war with the Romans; for the sacrifices offered on behalf of that nation
and the emperor were in consequence rejected. (J.W. 2.17.409) 177
Meanwhile, Jewish fighters took Masada, a Roman fort on the Dead Sea. Support for the
war was not unanimous. Officials in Jerusalem tried to mend the relationship with Rome.
In the end, they were unsuccessful and were forced to flee Jerusalem while the revolt
spread throughout the whole country. 178
The fighting was not confined simply to the Jews and Romans, or even to Judea.
Fighting broke out between many Greeks and Jews. Greeks fought against Jews in
Alexandria, and killed many of them in Caesarea Maritima and other cities. On the other
side, Jews killed many Greeks in Samaria, Galilee and the Transjordan. 179
The Jewish fighters had some initial success. In the autumn of 66 C.E. Cestius
Gallus arrived from Antioch with a good-sized force and attempted to put an end to the
revolt. He had some minor success on his way to Jerusalem, where he attempted to take
the temple, but he was driven back. The Jewish fighters were encouraged and took this to
be a sign that God was on their side. 180
Ultimately, their victory would be short lived. Shortly afterwards Nero appointed
Vespasian to lead the military campaign. He was very successful. In 67 C.E. he
177
Josephus: The Jewish War Books I-II, trans. H. St. J. Thackeray, LCL (Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1997).
178
M. A. Beek, Concise History of Israel, trans. Arnold J. Pomerans (New York: Harper & Row, 1963),
209.
179
Michael Grant, The History of Ancient Israel (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1984), 240.
180
Oesterley, History, 443-44.
100
controlled the region of Galilee, and in 68 C.E. he focused his attention on Judea. He then
prepared to take Jerusalem in 68 C.E., but the death of Nero forced him to suspend the
war and focus on other matters. 181 Eventually he became emperor and sent Titus to finish
quelling the revolt.
Titus arrived at Jerusalem in 70 C.E. and it took him five months to take
Jerusalem, sacking it and destroying the temple. The fighting was not completely over.
Most notably the military stronghold of Masada, which was taken early on by Jewish
fighters, was finally taken by Roman solders in 73 C.E. Unrest continued for sometime in
other parts of the Empire, particularly Alexandria. Outbreaks took place in other parts of
Egypt, in Libya, in Cyrene, were the Jews perpetrated terrible cruelties on the Gentile
population, and on the islands of Cyprus; in Mesopotamia, too, there was a rising. 182
The First Jewish-Roman War dramatically illustrates the social tensions and political
unrest between the Jewish people and the Gentiles.
The Bar Kokhba Revolt

The final revolt to be discussed is the Jewish revolt lead by Simeon Bar Kokhba,
which lasted from around 132 C.E. to approximately 135 C.E. 183 This revolt took place
under the reign of Emperor Publius Aelius Hadrianus, who ruled from 117 to 138 C.E.
The revolt is well documented. 184 Hadrian did two things to spark it. First, he confirmed
an edict issued by Domitian that banned castration. He also made significant additions.
181

183
184
The primary historical account of this revolt comes from Cassius Dio, who lived at the end of the second
and beginning of the third century. A shorter account is found in Eusebius Ecclesiastical History, written
by Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 263-339 CE). Finally, information in these accounts is confirmed by
archeological evidence, including the discovery of letters written by and addressed to Bar Kokhba.
182
101
He made it punishable by death and also included circumcision in the decree. 185 It is
important to note that the inclusion of circumcision was probably not directed at Jews
alone, as many people practiced circumcision. 186 Second, he planned to build a temple to
Jupiter in Jerusalem. 187 While this may be insensitive, it was probably not mean spirited.
Jerusalem was devastated in the First Jewish-Roman War, and rebuilding the city was
probably a well intentioned endeavor. Many Jews, however, were greatly offended.
The conditions were similar to those that lead to the Maccabean Revolt, and many
Jews rose in revolt and rallied around Bar Kokhba. Letters show that his real name was
Simeon Ben Kosiba. He claimed to be the messiah and was declared the messianic king
by at least one rabbi. Thus he adopted the name Bar Kokhba, meaning Son of a Star, a
reference to Num 24:17. 188 The revolt initially had great success. So convinced were the
Jews that the Messianic kingdom was about to be established that coins were stamped
with the inscription: Simon the Prince of Israel, For the Freedom of Jerusalem, For
the Freedom of Israel, and others. 189
The historian Cassius Dio recounts the beginning of the war and has one of the
more detailed accounts.
At first the Romans took no account of them. Soon, however, all Judaea
had been stirred up, and the Jews everywhere were showing signs of
disturbance, were gathering together, and giving evidence of great
hostility to the Romans, partly by secret and partly by overt acts; many
outside nations, too, were joining them through eagerness for gain, and the
185

See Herodotus II 104 for a list that includes Egyptians, Ethiopians, Colchians, Phoenicians, the Syrians
of Palestine, the Syrians of the valleys of the Thermodon and the Parthenius, and the Macrones. Herodotus:
Books I and II, trans. A. D. Godley, LCL (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1963), 393.
187
Dio Cassius lxix 12
188
Menahem Mansoor, Jewish History and Thought: An Introduction (Hoboken: Ktav Publishing House,
1991), 130.
189
186
102
whole earth, one might almost say, was being stirred up over the matter.
(Roman History, lxix 13) 190
What started as a small matter in Judea soon became a real concern for the Romans. Of
particular interest here is the connection that Jews outside of Judea had to their homeland,
as evident in the subversion mentioned in Cassius account.
As Rome sent troops to deal with the situation, the conflict became very violent.
The Jewish soldiers practiced guerilla warfare.
To be sure, they did not dare try conclusions with the Romans in the open
field, but they occupied the advantageous positions in the country and
strengthened them with mines and walls, in order that they might have
places of refuge whenever they should be hard pressed, and might meet
together unobserved under ground; and they pierced these subterranean
passages from above at intervals to let in air and light. (Roman History,
lxix 12) 191
The Jewish fighters were very successful. With the procurator of Judea unable to defeat
the revolt, Hadrian finally sent his most eminent military leader, Julius Severus. He
isolated and eliminated small areas of resistance, and thus made progress in the war.
The conflict ended with one final siege, which starved Bar Kokhbas followers,
and resulted in their death as well as Bar Kokhbas. Eusebius describes the end of the
conflict.
The siege lasted a long time before the rebels were driven to final
destruction by famine and thirst and the instigator of their madness paid
the penalty he deserved. Hadrian then commanded that by a legal decree
and ordinances the whole nation should be absolutely prevented from
entering from thenceforth even the district round Jerusalem, so that not
even from a distance could it see its ancestral home.( Eusebius IV 6) 192
190
Dio's Roman History: Books LXI - LXX, trans. Earnest Cary, LCL (Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1960), 449.
191
Dio's Roman History: Books LXI - LXX, 447-49.
192
Eusebius: Books I - V, trans. Kirsopp Lake, LCL (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1964), 313. See
also Dio Cassius lxix 13
103
The losses on both sides were great. Hadrian, when he announced the wars conclusion to
the Senate, left out the traditional opening that said he and his army were well. 193 In the
end, Jerusalem was rebuilt as originally intended and populated with Gentiles. 194
The Overall Relationship with Rome

It is important to point out that the preceding survey is somewhat one sided. The
relationship Jews had with Rome was in actuality a very complicated one. Jews lived
throughout the Empire, and, at least officially, they had a good relationship with the
Roman government. This is seen in there ability to worship as they saw fit, abstaining
from civic services that offended their religious sensibility.But this special treatment by
the government often created ill-will. Surrounding communities reportedly resented the
status afforded the Jewish people. This led to conflicts in regions around the Empire.
Thus the situation was complicated. Their relationship to the government was often very
good. Ironically, this often lead to a poor relationship with their neighboring
communities. 195
The Revolts in Light of the Social Identity Theory

It is generally accepted that the political turmoil in Judea had an impact upon the
NT. SIT illuminates some of the specific ways in which it had an impact. In relationship
to Galatians, the SIT provides three critical insights. First, uncertainty-identity theory
predicts that people will identify more strongly with their social identities in times of
uncertainty. This happened during the revolts, and was a contributing factor to the
193
Dio Cassius lxix 14

195
194
104
situation in Galatia. Second, SIT allows one to identify prototypical behaviors and beliefs
that define ones social identity. Many of these, such as circumcision and keeping kosher,
are seen in the revolts. It is not a coincidence that these same issues are seen in Galatia.
Third, SIT helps explain how things that undermine these prototypical behaviors and
beliefs are perceived by the group as a threat.
It is worth looking at these three issues in more detail. First, according to
uncertainty-identity theory, people identify more strongly with groups during times of
uncertainty. This is because group identification reduces feelings of uncertainty. It does
this in a few ways. Groups tell individuals who they are and prescribe specific attitudes,
beliefs, and behaviors. They also make their interactions with other people more
predictable. Finally the group continually validates ones worldview and sense of self.
Thus groups are effective tools for reducing uncertainty. 196
Furthermore, religions provide social identities ideally suited for this task. They
deal with issues related to the meaning of existence. They attempt to provide
epistemological and ontological certainty and thus have a power and scope that is rarely
seen in other groups. 197 In summary:
Uncertainty-identity theory generates an integrated psychological
explanation for a range of phenomena, including the everyday experience
and influence of religion in peoples lives; the potential power of religious
leaders, religious ideologies, and religious norms; the extremism of
religiously based intergroup conflicts; the paradox wherein religions and
religious people sometimes have to justify moral hypocrisy and harm
doing; and the way that religion, and religious fervor, can be a powerful
solace in times of personal and collective uncertainty. 198
196

Ysseldyk, Matheson, and Anisman, "Religiosity as Identity," 60.
198
197
105
This suggests that political and civil unrest in ancient Judea would have led some people
to identify more strongly with their Jewish identity.
The Dead Sea scrolls community at Qumran is probably the clearest example of
this. They isolated themselves and dramatically dedicated themselves to their religious
practice. I think that this is what is seen in Galatians. In response to mixed table
fellowship, Jewish followers of Jesus became more entrenched in their Jewish identity.
This entrenchment was fueled by the uncertainty created by the civil unrest in Jerusalem
and the incorporation of out-group Gentiles into their group. These followers, as Pauls
opponents, are discussed in detail below. It is worth noting here that they had strong
religious ties to Jerusalem. 199 Thus, even if Galatia itself was relatively peaceful, the
social unrest in Jerusalem could easily have provoked the opponents strict defense of
their Jewish identity.
Second, SIT allows us to identify some of the prototypical behaviors and beliefs
that defined Jewish identity. For example, a brief review of the revolts shows that
circumcision was important the Jewish people. Whether at the time of its prohibition by
Antiochus leading up to the Maccabean revolt or its prohibition by Hadrian nearly three
hundred years later, circumcision was clearly important to ones sense of Jewish identity.
Similar trends can be seen with dietary practices and the sanctity of the temple.
Circumcision, proper diet, and proper worship were all prototypical behaviors that carried
over throughout the centuries to play some part in each of these revolts. These same
issues are at the forefront in Galatians, as Jewish followers of Jesus defined their identity
in much the same way as their forefathers.
199
Richard N. Longenecker, Galatians, ed. Ralph P. Martin, vol. 41, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas:
Texas, 1990), xciv-xcv.
106
Finally, SIT helps one understand how challenges to prototypical behavior and
beliefs are understood as threats to ones identity. For example, when Antiochus and
Hadrian prohibited circumcision, many Jewish people took this to be an attack. It
threatened their sense of self by undermining the prototypical behavior behind their social
identities. This is true of any prototypical behavior or belief, such as dietary restrictions
(in the Maccabean revolt), the sanctity of the temple (an issue in the Maccabean and Bar
Kokhba revolts), or discomfort with honoring/submitting to a foreign ruler (as in the
revolt against the Quirinius Census or in the First Jewish-Roman War). Critically, as
discussed below in detail, these same issues surface in Galatia. Jewish followers of Jesus
feel that their identity is being threatened, because Gentiles begin to follow Jesus and
undermine traditional prototypical behavior (i.e. the law, circumcision). These Jewish
followers of Jesus then encounter the community in Galatia and attempt to reinforce their
traditional prototypes.
Thus, in light of SIT and the historical context, some of the Jewish followers of
Jesus turned to their Jewish identity in order to deal with the threat posed by mixed table
fellowship (discussed in detail below). This defense expressed itself through mandated
circumcision and Torah observance. These practices solve the problem of mixed table
fellowship and reflect the common prototypes seen in the Jewish revolts. The uncertainty
created by the unstable political situation in Jerusalem reinforced their response and
motivated them to adamantly defend their identity.
This situation had an impact in Galatia when Jewish followers of Jesus made their
way into the community. Not everyone reacted to mixed table fellowship this way, but
the evidence in Galatians suggests that many did. This is seen in the incident at Antioch.
107
Additionally, mixed table fellowship is probably the underling issue behind the
disagreements in Galatia. This would explain why Paul brings up the incident in Antioch
and why he devotes so much time to circumcision and the law. At this time the discussion
is rather abstract and somewhat removed from the text. As the rest of this work dives into
Galatians in detail, hopefully the connection will become clearer and more concrete.
Authorship
There is general agreement that Galatians is an authentic Pauline epistle.200 Paul
himself wrote the letter. More precisely, Paul dictated the letter and then signed off,
finishing the letter with his own hand. This is seen in Galatians 6:11,
(See in what large letters I write to you with my
hand). 201 He goes on from here to finish the letter with some concluding remarks. Pauls
authorship is critical because the personal accounts presented in the letter are actual
accounts from Paul himself. Thus, Galatians provides one with a first hand account of
some of the most contentious issues in the developing Jesus movement.
Destination
There is no consensus on the destination of Galatians. In Gal 1:2 the letter is
addressed (to the churches of Galatia). There is some
ambiguity, because the term Galatia had two meanings. First, Galatia was a Roman
200
Gordon D. Fee, Galatians (Dorset: Deo Publishing, 2007), 2.

All translations are my own, unless otherwise stated. Similarly, all Greek text is taken from B. Aland, K.
Aland, M. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, The Greek New Testament, 4th ed.
(Stuttgart: United Bible Society, 1993).
201
108
province, located in modern Turkey. 202 Second, Galatians could refer to the central
plateau of Asia Minor, originally inhabited by the Gauls. 203 This ambiguity has given rise
to two theories for the locations of these churches. First, if the term reflects the Roman
province, then it includes cities in the southern part of the province that Paul reportedly
traveled through. The theory that the churches mentioned were in these cities is referred
to as the South Galatian hypothesis. 204 If the term refers to the ethnic populations north of
these cities, then the churches could have been there. This theory is referred to as the
North Galatian hypothesis. 205
Research into Pauls vocabulary has found that he preferred to use proper Roman
names when referencing geographical regions. 206 But this has done little to settle the
debate, as the province includes the ethnic region. There is one other relevant piece of
information in Galatians. In Gal 4:13 Paul says
(but you knew that because of a weakness of the flesh I
first preached the gospel to you). It is unclear what this illness was, and many have been
suggested. It could have been anything from an eye related problem (perhaps suggested
202
Willard H. Taylor, Galatians Ephesians, ed. William M Greathouse and Willard H. Taylor, vol. 8,
Beacon Bible Expositions (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1981), 9.
203
Ronald Y. K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians (Grand Rapids: Michigan, 1988), 1.
204
For defenders of the South Galatian theory see: Taylor, Galatians Ephesians, 9-10. Frank J. Matera,
Galatians, ed. Daniel J. Harrington, Sacra Pagina Series (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1992), 23-24.
John Bligh, Galatians: A Discussion of Paul's Epistle (London: St Paul Publications, 1969), 3-7. Fung,
Galatians, 1-3. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 1982), 3-18.
Longenecker, Galatians, lxi-lxxii; Benjamin W. Bacon, The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians (New York:
The Macmillan Company, 1909), 17-25; E. H. Askwith, The Epistle to the Galatians (London: Macmillan
and Co., 1902); Allan Wainwright, "Where Did Silas Go (and What Was His Connection with Galatians),"
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 8 (1980): 66-70. For an examination of its relationship to Acts,
see: Christoph W. Stenschke, "Hinweise Zu Einem Wiederentdeckten Gebiet der Actaforschung (I) und Zu
Zwei Bemerkenswerten Monographien Zu Apostelgeschichte 13f und zum Galaterbrief (II)," Communio
Viatorum 41, no. 1 (1999): 65-91.
205
For defenders of the North Galatian theory see: Hans Dieter Betz, Galatians, ed. Helmut Koester, et al.,
Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979), 3-5.
206
Longenecker, Galatians, lxx.
109
in v.15 by the Galatians willingness to tear their eyes out) to malaria or epilepsy. 207
What is significant is that Paul may have traveled to the higher regions of northern
Galatia to seek relief. 208 In any case, all that can be said for sure is that the churches were
somewhere within the province of Galatia. 209
Date
Just as with the question of its destination, there is no consensus on the date of
Galatians. Argued dates for the letter range from 49 C.E. to 58 C.E. 210 The arguments put
forth tend to take two forms. First, many arguments are closely intertwined with ones
position on the North Galatian vs. South Galatian theories. These arguments hinge on
how one understands the relationship between Pauls travels mentioned in Acts and
Pauls account of his travels in Galatians 1-2.
Second, many arguments hinge on how one sees the relationship between the
arguments put forth in Galatians and those put forth in the rest of Pauls letters. Some
scholars see Pauls arguments in Galatians as less refined and developed than those in his
other letters. Thus, they date Galatians early. Others take the opposite position, dating the
207
For a discussion of Pauls illness and his thorn see: Troy W. Martin, "Whose Flesh? What Temptation?
(Galatians 4:13-14)," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 74 (1999): 65-91; A. J. Goddard and S.
A. Cummins, "Ill or Ill-Treated? Conflict and Persecution as the Context of Paul's Original Ministry in
Galatia (Galatians 4:12-20)," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 52 (1993): 93-126; D. G.
McCartney, "No Grace without Weakness," Westminster Theological Journal 61, no. 1 (1999): 1-13;
Michael L. Barr, "Qumran and The "Weakness" Of Paul," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 42, no. 2 (1980):
216-27; R. Russell, "Redemptive Suffering and Paul's Thorn in the Flesh," Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 39, no. 4 (1996): 559-70; David M. Park, "Paul's Skolops T Sarki: Thorn or Stake (2
Cor 12:7)," Novum Testamentum 22, no. 2 (1980): 179-83; Terence Y. Mullins, "Paul's Thorn in the
Flesh," Journal of Biblical Literature 76, no. 4 (1957): 299-303; Neil G. Smith, "Thorn That Stayed: An
Exposition of 2 Corinthians 12:7-9," Interpretation 13, no. 4 (1959): 409-16.
208
Longenecker, Galatians, 190-91.
209
Fee, Galatians, 3-4. For a detailed analysis of the northern and southern theories and their relation to
Acts see Longenecker, Galatians.
210
G. N. Stanton, "Galatians," in The Oxford Bible Commentary, ed. John Barton and John Muddiman
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 1153.
110
letter late. Utilizing both lines of reasoning, scholars have reached a variety of
conclusions. 211
In the end, neither line of reasoning is particularly conclusive, and nearly all
scholars warn against adopting a dogmatic position on the issue. Acts remains a
secondary source. Even if one takes it as an accurate and independent account (two
highly debated issues), it does not provide enough information for one to draw a solid
conclusion. Additionally, arguments based upon the development of Pauls thinking face
multiple problems. For example, each letter Paul wrote was addressed to a particular
audience and situation. Naturally he tailored his argument to the specific situation. This
makes it difficult to pin down a natural progression of thought. Secondly, the proposed
chronology of theological development often hinges upon the scholars own opinion of
which argument is more sophisticated, powerful, or developed. While some endeavors
(e.g. a history of Pauls thought, a history of the early church) would warrant a detailed
discussion of the issue, the date of the epistle has little bearing upon this work. Therefore
I will simply examine what we can glean from the letter itself.
Galatians narrows the time of authorship very little, but the letter is critical
because it provides the most complete autobiographical account of Paul early life within
the church. The account starts in Gal 1:11-12 with Pauls claim that he learned the gospel
(through a revelation of Jesus Christ). Then in 1:16-17
he explains that he went to Arabia and Damascus following this experience. The first
point of chronology is in 1:18, when Paul claims that (after three years) he
211
For proponents of an early date see: Betz, Galatians, 11-12. Bruce, Galatians, 43-56. Longenecker,
Galatians, lxxii-lxxxviii. Taylor, Galatians Ephesians, 9-10. Fung, Galatians, 9-28; William B. Decker,
"The Early Dating of Galatians," Restoration Quarterly 2, no. 3 (1958): 132-38. For proponents of a later
date see: Fee, Galatians, 4-5; Bligh, Galatians, 1.
111
went to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter. Then he went to Syria and Cilicia. He
then provides the second point of chronology in 2:1, where he says that he went to
Jerusalem again (after fourteen years).
Galatians thus provides three points in time. There is Pauls conversion, then the
first trip to Jerusalem, then the second trip to Jerusalem. It is not known if the three years
mentioned between the conversion and the first trip, and the fourteen years between the
first trip and the second trip to Jerusalem, should be taken concurrently or consecutively.
If consecutively, then there is a 17 year window between Pauls conversion and his
second trip to Jerusalem. On the other hand, if his statement of 14 years refers back to his
original conversion and not to his first trip to Jerusalem, then there is only a 14 year
window. It is not clear which is intended. 212
This gives scholars something to work with. Paul became a follower of Jesus after
his death. Jesus is generally thought to have died either in 30 C.E. or 33 C.E. 213 If one
allows for a few years between Jesus death and Pauls conversion, then we are left with
Pauls second visit to Jerusalem taking place somewhere between 47 C.E. (30 + 3 + 14)
and 53 C.E. (33 + 3 + 17). 214 Paul then wrote Galatians sometime after this. This helps
little in dating Galatians, but it does demonstrate that dates before the late 40s are
untenable. If I were pressed to take a position, I would date Galatians early.
212
Bruce, Galatians, 106.

Longenecker, Galatians, lxxxii.
214
Interestingly enough, Paul must have converted to Christianity before 40 CE, in order to account for his
escape from Aretas, recalled by Paul in 2 Cor 11:32.
213
112
Mixed Table Fellowship
Behind the situation in Galatians is a disagreement over mixed table fellowship.
Mixed table fellowship refers to the practice of Jews and Gentiles eating together, sharing
the same food and drink. It is important to distinguish this from the practice of eating
separate food in the same location, which Esler calls a meal in parallel. 215 Generally
speaking, Jews were allowed to eat with Gentiles if they were eating their own food and
drink, which was strictly prepared and supervised. They were not allowed to eat the same
food as their Gentile companions.
This can be seen in a wide range of texts. For a glimpse of the general prohibition
of mixed table fellowship one can look at texts such as Dan 1:3-17, dated in its current
form to the 2nd century B.C.E. In the passage Daniel refuses to eat and drink the kings
food and wine. As it says in Dan 1:8, But Daniel made up his mind that he would not
defile himself with the kings choice food or with the wine which he drank (NASB).
Daniel proceeds to eat vegetables and water, gaining Gods favor in the process.
A similar refusal to participate in mixed table fellowship is found in the
apocryphal additions to Esther, And your servant has not eaten at Hamans table, and I
have not honored the kings feast or drunk the wine of libations (Esther 14:17 NRSV).
Interestingly the Book of Jubilees, a popular work at Qumran, also prohibits mixed table
fellowship in 22:16, Separate thyself from the nations, and eat not with them: and do not
215
Philip F. Esler, E. P. Sanders, and Craig Hill have had extensive disagreements over the prohibition of
mixed table fellowship that are more the product of conflating these two practices than an actually
disagreement over ancient practice. See Esler, Galatians, 93-116.
113
according to their works, and become not their associate; For their works are unclean, and
all their ways are a pollution and an abomination and uncleanness. 216
While the community at Qumran certainly does not represent the mainstream
Jewish practice of the day, its prohibition is certainly in line with the previous texts.
Other texts clearly show the practice of eating a meal in parallel. For example, Judith
1:19 shows Judith eating and drinking what her maid prepared for her, instead of the
previously prepared feast (1:10). Another example is found in Joseph and Asenath 7:1, in
which Joseph came into the house of Pentephres and sat upon a chair. And they washed
his feet, and set a table before him separately, for that Joseph did not eat with the
Egyptians, since this was an abomination to him. 217 The text does not explain why this
was an abomination, but both the prohibition against mixed table fellowship and the
practice of having a meal in parallel are clear. Finally, in the Letter of Aristeas details the
process of hosting a meal in parallel, as the Israelites who translated the Hebrew
Scriptures into Greek are seen dining with the Egyptian King. For the meal the King
prepares everything in accordance with Jewish custom, he dispenses with the sacred
heralds and the sacrificing priests normally involved, and instead allows a Jewish priest
to offer a prayer (Letter of Aristeas 180-186). 218
The citations above provide strong evidence for the existence of a prohibition
against mixed table fellowship, which often resulted in the taking of a meal in parallel.
The exact reasons behind this prohibition are less clear. Writings which speak of being
216
R. H. Charles, "The Book of Jubilees," in Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, ed. R. H. Charles
(Bellingham: Logos Research Systems, 2004).
217
E. W. Brooks, Joseph and Asenath, Translation of Early Documents Series II: Hellenistic-Jewish Texts
(New York: The Macmillan Co., 1918).
218
Herbert T. Andrews, "The Letter of Aristeas," in Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, ed. R. H.
Charles (Bellingham: Logos Research Systems, 2004).
114
defiled, or of the practice as an abomination, do little to explain the situation. The
prohibition certainly reflected a concern over dietary restrictions, and a case can be made
that it also reflected concern over idolatry. 219
This is hinted at in the texts above, with the reference to libations in Esther and
possibly with the reference to wine in Daniel. In other texts the connection is explicit. For
example:
But rather, you are to tear down their altars and smash their sacred pillars
and cut down their Asherim for you shall not worship any other god,
for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God otherwise you
might make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land and they would
play the harlot with their gods and sacrifice to their gods, and someone
might invite you to eat of his sacrifice. (Exod 34:13-16 NASB)
In this passage, the connection is clear. The relationship between the risk of idolatry and
mixed table fellowship can be also be seen hundreds of years later, in the Abodah Zarah,
which probably dates to the late 2nd century C.E. 220
This text, along with others from the Talmud, is particularly sensitive to the
handling of wine and strictly prohibits libations. The text warns that Gentiles should not
have access to open containers of wine, because they might offer a libation (Abodah
Zarah 71a-73b). For this very reason, it even warns against eating at the same table as a
Gentile with two separate containers of wine (Abodah Zarah 72a-73a).
Finally, the issue of eating food dedicated to idols is seen clearly in the NT, in 1
Cor 8-10. The issue is clearly causing difficulties within the community. Paul explains
that followers of Jesus are free to eat meat sacrificed to idols, because they know that the
idols are powerless (8:4). On the other hand, in 1 Cor 8:9-13 Paul warns that eating food
sacrificed to idols can bother anothers conscience. In 1 Cor 8:13, he concludes that
219
220

115
, ,
(therefore, if food offends my brother, I will never eat
meat again, so that I will not offend my brother). Idolatry, in connection with food
preparation, was certainly a pressing issue in this particular Pauline community.
In summary, in the ancient Judaism there was a prohibition against mixed table
fellowship. This prohibition did not prevent Jews and Gentiles from sharing a meal in
parallel, in which both parties had their own food. But it did prohibit them from sharing
the same food. This prohibition was connected to concerns over idolatry, whether through
libations or sacrificed meat. The Eucharist was originally the sharing of one cup and one
loaf of bread (1 Cor 10:16-17). As Gentiles began to follow Jesus, the Eucharist became a
practice in mixed table fellowship. This was a critical issue, and it sparked the
controversy in Galatians.
The Incident at Antioch

, ,
.
,
. []
, .
When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was
condemned. For before the coming of certain ones from James he ate with
the Gentiles, but when they came he withdrew and separated himself,
fearing the ones of circumcision. The rest of the Jews joined him in
hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was lead astray by their hypocrisy.
(Gal 2:11-13)
These verses belong to one of the most complicated passages in the NT. Prior to
this account (Gal 1:11-2:10), Paul provides the chronology of his early travels (discussed
above), distances himself from the authorities in Jerusalem (discussed below), and reports
116
that the early church leaders in Jerusalem endorsed his missionary efforts with the
Gentiles. Making the passage more complicated, the following verses (v. 14-21) raise the
issues of the law, grace, and justification (discussed below).
In order to stay on point, focus will be on Gal 2:11-13. In short, the disagreement
between Peter (called Cephas) and Paul in this passage is over mixed table fellowship.
This interpretation of the text is the most probably for two key reasons. First, the issue at
the heart of the conflict must have involved meals, given that Pauls complains that Peter
originally ate with Gentiles, and then withdrew from them after the arrival of people from
James (v. 12). Presumably these people were Jewish followers of Jesus. Not only did they
come from James (a Jewish follower himself), but they were then joined by
(the rest of the Jews). Thus, Peter goes from practicing mixed table fellowship
to eating exclusively with fellow Jewish followers of Jesus.
Second, this interpretation is consistent with Pauls acceptance in v. 9. In v. 9
James, Peter, and John approve of Pauls mission to the Gentiles. Therefore, it is unlikely
that Peters view in Antioch would be any different. Peter most likely still approved of
Pauls mission. Therefore, a dispute over table fellowship makes the most sense of the
data available. It allows Peter to remain consistent in his position, approving of his
mission to the Gentiles, and still explains why Peter would withdraw himself and eat with
other Jews.
Indeed, while somewhat speculative, it seems that Peter is withdrawing from
mixed table fellowship in deference to the sensitivities of the Jews who just arrived. If so,
Peter would be taking a position similar to the Pauls in 1 Cor 8-10, where Paul himself
declares in 1 Cor 8:13, ,
117
, (therefore, if food offends my
brother, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not offend my brother). 221 It is not that
the situations are the same, but that in each case the person abstains from a practice
which disturbs his or her spiritual sibling. In Antioch Peter withdraws from mixed table
fellowship, and in 1 Cor Paul recommends avoiding food sacrificed to idols. For these
reasons, I think that the disagreement between Paul and Peter at Antioch is over mixed
table fellowship, and this same issue is the driving the conflict in Galatia.
The Situation in Galatia

Paul wrote his letters to address specific concerns that he had and to address
specific problems that he saw. Pauls concern in Galatians is clear. He believed that the
Galatians had departed from the true Gospel of Christ, adopting a different gospel (1:69). 222 This (different gospel) required both circumcision and
observing the (law). Because of this, Paul spends the majority of the letter arguing
against the (law) and circumcision.
As to the agitators in Galatia, and the specifics of the situation, one can only make
educated guesses based upon what Paul writes. First, the (different
221
If Paul and Peter had a previous agreement, this would also explain the apparent shift in Peters position.
However the nature of any agreement they might have had is uncertain. See also: William O. Walker,
"Galatians 2:7b-8 as a Non-Pauline Interpolation," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 65, no. 4 (2003): 568-87;
William O. Walker, "Galatians 2:8 and the Question of Paul's Apostleship," Journal of Biblical Literature
123, no. 2 (2004): 323-27; Larry W. Hurtado, "The Jerusalem Collection and the Book of Galatians,"
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 5 (1979): 46-62; Traugott Holtz, "Die Bedeutung des
Apostelkonzils Fr Paulus," Novum Testamentum 16, no. 2 (1974): 110-48; Enno Edzard Popkes, ""Bevor
einer von Jakobus kam...": Anmerkungen zur Textkritischen und Theologiegeschichtlichen Problematik
von Gal 2,12," Novum Testamentum 46, no. 3 (2004): 253-64; Caroline E. Johnson Hodge, "Apostle to the
Gentiles: Constructions of Paul's Identity," Biblical Interpretation 13, no. 3 (2005): 270-88.
222
David Armitage, "An Exploration of Conditional Clause Exegesis with Reference to Galatians 1,8-9,"
Biblica 88, no. 3 (2007): 365-92; Bernard Lategan, "Is Paul Defending His Apostleship in Galatians?,"
New Testament Studies 34 (1988): 411-30.
118
gospel) seems to come from people outside of the Galatian community, and not from
within the Galatians community itself. In 1:7 Paul refers to those
(who trouble you) and in 5:10 to (the one who troubles you).
Looking at a variety of passages (e.g. 1:7-9; 3:1; 4:17; 5:7, 12; 6:12-13), Paul repeatedly
refers to the Galatians in the second person, and the agitators in the third, further
suggesting that the agitators came from outside the Galatian community.
Second, the agitators argued that followers of Jesus needed to be circumcised and
observe the (law), which Paul sees as a perversion of the Gospel (1:7). This is
Pauls understanding, and it is reasonable to assume that Paul would have had at least a
basic knowledge of the situation in Galatia. Third, Pauls claim in 6:12 that the agitators
seek to avoid persecution for the cross of Christ suggests that they were followers of
Jesus.
Finally, they are religiously Jewish. Thus, they are committed to a Jewish social
identity. This is strongly suggested by the focus of Pauls arguments, on Abraham (3:69), righteousness vis--vis the law (3:10-14), the covenant (3:15-18), and the role of the
law (3:19-4:7). Finally, this is seen in the superiority of the (Jerusalem
above) over the earthly city of Jerusalem (4:21-31). 223
If Pauls evaluation of their motives in 6:12-13 is accurate, then they were
probably ethnically Jewish as well. Being persecuted by other Jews, Pauls opponents
likely had close ties to the traditional Jewish community. This seems more likely if they
were ethnically Jewish. It is worth noting that the opponents do not need to have been
ethnically Jewish in order to be affected by the turmoil in Jerusalem. They only needed to
223
Longenecker, Galatians, XCV.
119
embrace a Jewish identity that held Jerusalem in high regard. In other words, they only
need to be Jewish identified.
In summary, the community in Galatia faced pressure from Jewish followers of
Jesus who were from outside of their community. They argued that the Galatians needed
to observe the (law) and be circumcised. It is difficult to be more precise than this
concerning their teachings, considering that Paul does not seem to know the agitators
personally (3:1, 5:10). 224
In light of the problem with mixed-table fellowship and Pauls recounting of the
incident in Antioch, the agitators probably viewed Gentile adherence to the (law)
as the solution to the problem of mixed table fellowship. This would have been reason
enough for them to bring their message to Galatia. It is possible that the agitators were
missionaries sent from a church in Jerusalem, but I do not think there is enough evidence
to support such a strong claim. 225
On the other hand, it does seem likely that they had strong religious ties to
Jerusalem. Paul goes to great lengths in chapters one and two to distance himself from
Jerusalem and the leaders of the church there. He received the gospel through a revelation
of Jesus Christ, declaring that his gospel is not according to men, nor did he receive it
from men (1:12). After his revelation he waits to go up to Jerusalem, not consulting flesh
and blood, or the apostles that preceded him (1:16-17). When he finally does goes up to
224
For a more detailed discussion of the agitators see: T. D. Lea, "Unscrambling the Judaizers: Who Were
Paul's Opponents?," Southwestern Journal of Theology 37, no. 1 (1994): 23-29; W. Russell, "Who Were
Paul's Opponents in Galatia?," Bibliotheca Sacra 147, no. 587 (1990): 329-50; J. M. G. Barclay, "MirrorReading a Polemical Letter: Galatians as a Test Case," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 31
(1987): 73-93; D. S. Dockery, "Introduction to the Epistle and Paul's Defense of His Apostleship (Galatians
1:1-2:14)," Review and Expositor 91, no. 2 (1994): 157-58; Joseph B. Tyson, "Paul's Opponents in
Galatia," Novum Testamentum 10, no. 4 (1968): 241-54; Roy Bowen Ward, "The Opponents of Paul,"
Restoration Quarterly 10, no. 4 (1967): 186-89.
225
Longenecker, Galatians, XCIV.
120
Jerusalem, the so called pillars of the church add nothing to him, and extend to him the
right hand of fellowship (2:6-10). This is followed later by his emphasis of the
(Jerusalem above) over the earthy Jerusalem in 4:25-26. The great effort
Paul puts into distancing his message and knowledge from Jerusalem and the leaders
there suggests that the agitators had religious ties to Jerusalem. 226
It is not clear if they came from Jerusalem, came from James, argued that Peter
and James practice the (law) and circumcision, or merely looked to the church in
Jerusalem for guidance. But Jerusalem was probably important to both their theology and
social identity. This is the critical point that ties the civil unrest and uncertainty of
Jerusalem, discussed above, to the situation in Galatia.
The immediate cause of the crisis in Galatia and the immediate threat to the
agitators identity is the Gentile Gospel, which undermines their traditional prototypes. In
accordance with uncertainty-identity theory, the agitators probably identified more
strongly with the traditional Jewish prototypes (i.e. the law) in order to deal with the
uncertainty created by the situation in Jerusalem. Their efforts to get other followers of
Jesus to do the same would be an extension of this process, combating the threat posed by
mixed table fellowship.
Galatians itself provides evidence that other Jews were undergoing a similar
process. Paul mentions the agitators desire to avoid persecution (6:12). The agitators
themselves would not have seen the situation this way; but the passage speaks to the
existence of Jews persecuting other Jews for not living properly. This is also seen in
226
Longenecker, Galatians, XCV.
121
Pauls life, where he admits that he
(excessively persecuted the church of God and destroyed it).
This social pressure is exactly what SIT predicts would happen in Jerusalem. As
people felt uncertain about their future, they would rely more heavily upon their Jewish
social identity. This would make them less tolerant of behavior that undermined the
groups prototype (i.e. the law). It is this pressure, coming out of the social upheaval in
Jerusalem, that is being felt in Galatia. It has been suggested that the zealots persecuted
the agitators who came to Galatia. 227 Given that the zealots were active in the First
Jewish-Roman War, this would fit nicely, but without more evidence it is impossible to
make such a specific declaration.
In summary, the agitators came to Galatia and argued that followers of Jesus
should keep the (law) and be circumcised. They saw this as necessary for dealing
with the problem of mixed table fellowship. They were most likely Jewish followers of
Jesus with strong religious ties to Jerusalem. The uncertainty in Jerusalem caused them to
identify more strongly with their Jewish identity, and thus insist upon its traditional
prototypical prescriptions. This process is also seen in the persecution practiced by Paul
and in the persecution Paul mentions in (6:12).
227
Longenecker, Galatians, XCV-XCVI.
122
Chapter 6: Rhetoric
Ever since Betzs 1979 commentary on Galatians, scholars have had to address
the relationship between Galatians and ancient rhetoric. 228 Betzs suggestion that
Galatians adhered to ancient practices of rhetoric took hold. Other scholars came forward
suggesting different interpretations, viewing Galatians through different aspects of
ancient rhetoric. Betzs suggestion may have had such an impact because Paul is so
clearly arguing for a particular position in Galatians. He writes with purpose. He defends
a clear theological position, appealing to scripture, tradition, and logic to support it.
Because of this, understanding Galatians is largely a quest in understanding Pauls
reasoning. Galatians is not simply about what Paul believed; it is about how he saw the
world, how he interpreted what he saw, and the logical framework upon which it all held
together. This makes Galatians a tempting target for rhetorical analysis. Indeed, it is not a
question of whether or not Galatians should be analyzed rhetorically, but of which
rhetorical framework should be used for the analysis.
Betzs 1979 commentary opened the way with an extremely detailed analysis of
Galatians. He starts by describing the genre of Galatians:
The apologetic letter, such as Galatians, presupposes the real or fictitious
situation of the court of law, with jury, accuser, and defendant. In the case
of Galatians, the addresses are identical with the jury, with Paul being the
defendant, and his opponents the accusers. This situation makes Pauls
Galatian letter a self apology, delivered not in person but in a written
form. 229
228
For an overview see: Mark P. Surburg, "Ancient Rhetorical Criticism, Galatians, and Paul at TwentyFive Years," Concordia Journal 30, no. 1-2 (2004): 13-39. See also: James D. Hester, "The Rhetorical
Structure of Galatians 1:11-2:14," Journal of Biblical Literature 103, no. 2 (1984): 223-33; Terrance
Callan, "The Style of Galatians," Biblica 88, no. 4 (2007): 496-516; Moiss Silva, "Betz and Bruce on
Galatians," Westminster Theological Journal 45, no. 2 (1983): 371-85; Takaaki Haraguchi, "Words of
Blessing and Curse: A Rhetorical Study of Galatians," Asia Journal of Theology 18, no. 1 (2004): 33-50.
229
Betz, Galatians, 24.
123
Thus, for Betz, Paul writes Galatians as though he were speaking in a court of law. This
understanding carries throughout Betzs commentary.
According to Betz, the genre of the apologetic letter arose in the 4th century
B.C.E., and is dependent upon the older genres of letter writing, autobiographical speech,
and apologetic speech. He points out that these genres are well established by writers
such as Plato, Isocrates, Demosthenes, Cicero, and Libanius. 230 From here, Betz goes on
to provide a detailed division of the letter: epistolary prescript 1:1-5, exordium 1:6-11,
narratio 1:12-2:14, propositio 2:15-21, probatio 3:1-4:31, exhortatio 5:1-6:10, and the
epistolary postcript (conclusio) 6:11-18. 231
The first section, the epistolary prescript, conforms to that of Pauls other
letters. 232 The second section, the exordium, is an introduction and is drawn from
Aristotles Rhetorica, the Rhetorica ad Herennium, Ciceros De inventione, and
Quintilian. Betz analyzes this section in light of these various authors, assigning various
verses to the styles depicted in one or the other.
For example, according to Rhetorica ad Herennium, verses 6-7 mix two different
styles of exordia.
The principium, is appropriate in addressing an audience where attention,
receptivity, and a favorable disposition can be obtained directly and
without difficulty, while the insinuatio should be used in cases where, for
example, the audience has been won over by the previous speech of the
opponent. 233
Betz notes that this mixture of types seems odd, but responds by pointing out that it fits
Pauls situation and that Cicero seemed to be more comfortable with mixing types of
230
Betz, Galatians, 14-15.

232
233
231
124
exordia. Verses 8-9 are compared to Quintilians discussion of exordium, where he
discusses using threats against the judge when the situation is desperate. Betz views
Pauls curse as a form of threat, and interprets the two verses in light of Quintilian.
Finally, he sees verses 10-11 as a transition into the next section, again in line with
Quintilian. 234
In line with the recommendation of ancient rhetoricians, Pauls next section is the
narratio (1:12-2:14). The narratio, or narrative, is a statement of facts. According to
Quintilian, the section is not governed by a single rule or law, instead it must adapt to the
specific circumstances of the situation. First, Betz looks at Pauls denials in light of
Quintilians teaching that the denial of legal charges should not be a simple statement.
Instead it should bring facts to bear that make the denial more plausible. Betz sees this in
Pauls insistence that he received the gospel from God, and not from men.
Second he points out that ancient rhetoricians argued that the narratio should be
brief, clear, and plausible. Thus Betz analyzes the passage from this position, taking
much guidance from Quintilian. Betz argues that Pauls writing is certainly clear,
providing clear facts, people, and places, in accordance with Quintilians advice. Next he
argues that Paul is also brief, stating only the facts necessary for the case, and using
multiple shorter sentences. Finally, Betz argues that Paul establishes the plausibility of
his case by following Quintilians advice to portray his opponents in such a way that is
consistent with your case. 235
234
235

125
The next section, the propositio, sums up the legal content of the narratio by this
outline of the case and provides an easy transition to the probatio. 236 Verses 2:15-21,
which Betz designates as the propositio, have been notoriously difficult to place within
the text. It is unclear whether they continue Pauls discussion with Peter, started in verses
14-16, or if Pauls account of the Antioch incident ended in verse 16. Betz solution is to
view the verses as a propositio that summarizes key points from the preceding verses.
Thus, verses 15-16 summarize the points of agreement between Paul and his
opponents. Verses 17-18 contain the points of disagreement, while verses 19-20 contain
the exposition in four theological theses. Finally, verse 21 concludes with a refutatio, the
denial of a charge. 237 This section then leads into the probatio section, in 3:1-4:31.
In a speech, the probatio section is the most decisive of all because in it
the proofs are presented. This part determines whether or not the speech
as a whole will succeed. Exordium and narratio are only preparatory steps
leading up to this central part. The purpose of the probatio (as Quintilian
calls it) or the confirmation (as Cicero and the Rhetorica ad Herennium
call it) is to establish credibility for the defense by a system of
arguments. 238
Betz admits that is it more difficult to match chapters 3 and 4 with the probatio then it
was to match the previous sections with their respective rhetorical tool. Paul often
interrupts his own arguments with sections of dialogue, examples, proverbs and
quotations, which appear to hamper his use of rhetorical techniques.
Betz argues that these inconsistencies actually help Pauls case. He points out that
speeches run the risk of being boring (i.e. unpersuasive) if they are to rigidly bound to
logic. Thus Quintilians advises the speaker to diversify his rhetoric. The rhetoric should
236

238
237
126
therefore be a mixture of logic, emotional appeal, wisdom, beauty, and some
entertainment. For Betz, this is what Paul accomplishes. 239
The penultimate section, the exhortatio or parenesis, occupies 5:1-6:10. Betz
points out that the study of this section in modern scholarship has been underdeveloped,
with little consensus surrounding its definition. Additionally, the section played only a
small role in ancient handbooks on rhetoric. On the other hand, the practice appears much
more frequently in philosophical letters. Some writers even claim to include parenesis
because the traditional forms of rhetorical reasoning are too lifeless. Thus, Betzs
discussion of this section lacks the same detailed references to ancient works found in the
previous sections. 240
Finally, Betz addresses the epistolary postscript, or conclusio, of 6:11-18. He
points out that Pauls addition of a postscript in his own hand matches epistolary
conventions of the time. It serves to summarize the main points, authenticate the letter,
and add any final points that need to be made. Rhetorically, this section is a conclusio or
peroration.
The general purpose of the peroration is twofold: it serves as a last chance
to remind the judge or the audience of the case, and it tries to make a
strong emotional impression upon them. The three conventional parts of
the peroration carry out this task: the enumeratio or recapitulatio sharpens
and sums up the main points of the case, the indignatio arouses anger and
hostility against the opponents, and the conquestio stimulates pity. 241
Betz sees this final section as the hermenutical key for understanding Pauls intentions.
Thus he interprets the final verses in light of this model. For example, he draws a parallel
between the marks of Jesus born by Paul, mentioned in 6:17, and the practice of
239

241
240
127
conquestio, in which the defendants worth is demonstrated by the battle scars that he
bares.
Taken all together, it is easy to understand why Betzs work had such a large
impact. It applied a clear, period-appropriate model of discourse to the letter of Galatians.
This gave scholars the opportunity to look beyond the theological content of Pauls letters
and to attempt to understand the reasoning behind Pauls writing. It did not look at the
logic behind his arguments, but why he chose some arguments over others, and the
intended impact that these arguments were meant to have.
I think that it is more than coincidence that this work corresponded
chronologically with the emergence of SSC. It uses an explicit model in an attempt to
understand the social context (i.e. ancient rhetorical thought) surrounding the text. This
allows the particulars of Pauls writing to stand out against the broader social
background, and also helps the modern reader to properly understand Pauls intent.
This is not to say that Betzs work is without serious difficulties. I, along with
others, think that his chosen model of apologetic letter (or as others call it, forensic
rhetoric) is inapplicable to Galatians. There is simply no reason to think that Paul is
envisioning a court room setting. But it is important to recognize the important
contributions that Betz has made to Pauline scholarship and the study of Galatians. He
paved the way for other scholars to pursue similar lines of inquiry, and certainly changed
the way in which we approach the text.
It is worth looking at some other scholars and the work they have done updating
Betz approach, and how they view Galatians rhetorically. Probably the next best known
commentary on Galatians, Richard N. Longeneckers commentary Galatians, published
128
in 1990, is a solid source of information on Galatians. 242 Longenecker has some concerns
with Betzs interpretation of Galatians rhetoric. He acknowledges that chapters 1 and 2
fit well within Betzs view of Galatians as forensic rhetoric, but points out that the model
breaks down in chapters 3-4 and 5-6. 243 This is apparent when moving through Betzs
work as examples and references to ancient rhetoricians become more and more
infrequent.
Even Betz acknowledges, when discussing chapters 3-4, that an analysis of these
chapters in terms of rhetoric is extremely difficult. 244 He acknowledges that Pauls
argumentative strategy is difficult to follow but suggests that this is because Paul
successfully disguises his rhetoric. He argues that this may have been done because
rhetoric loses its effectiveness when the recipient is aware of the techniques employed. 245
Unfortunately for Betz, I think the more plausible explanation is that the model
does not fit the data. That is, Paul is not in this section employing forensic rhetoric.
Longenecker concludes that Betz pushed his thesis too far. He argues that while the first
two chapters reflect forensic rhetoric, the third and fourth chapters reflect Jewish
rhetorical conventions while chapters 5 and 6 are more in line with a deliberative form of
rhetoric. 246
Finally, Longenecker thinks that Betzs application of forensic rhetoric is too
strict and ridged, not allowing for the influence of other literary forms and the possibility
of indirect influence. 247 Ultimately, Longenecker adopts a more eclectic approach.
242
Longenecker, Galatians.
Longenecker, Galatians, CXI.
244
245
246
Longenecker, Galatians, CXI.
247
Longenecker, Galatians, CXI-CXIII.
243
129
The persuasive modes of the classical rhetorical handbooks had become
the common coinage of the realm in Pauls day. One did not have to be
formally trained in rhetoric to use them. Nor did rhetoricians have
proprietary rights on them. In his Galatian letter (as elsewhere in his
writings), Paul seems to have availed himself almost unconsciously of the
rhetorical forms at hand, fitting them into his inherited epistolary
structures and filling them out with such Jewish theological motifs and
exegetical methods as would be particularly significant in counters what
the Judaizers were telling his convertsIt is, in fact, this combination of
Hellenistic epistolary structures, Greco-Roman rhetorical forms, Jewish
exegetical procedures, and Christian soteriological confessions together,
of course, with Pauls own revelation experiences and pastoral concerns
that makes up Pauls letter to the Galatians. 248
Thus, in many ways Longeneckers approach is the mirror opposite of Betz. While Betz
attempted to adhere strictly to his chosen model, Longenecker sought different models,
different genres of ancient writing, and attempted to create a mosaic that accurately
reflected the specific situation and text of Galatians.
Which approach is best is still vigorously debated in SSC. It is worth briefly
touching on the debate here, as it both clarifies the difference between Betz and
Longenecker, and helps place this work in the proper context. Some scholars,
prominently Malina, argue for the use of clear ridged models that can be appropriately
applied to the situation. Others, such as Meeks and Theissen, argue for a more eclectic
approach that tailors multiple models to the specific circumstances under examination.
It is inappropriate to think that one must adhere to one of the two approaches. The
single model and multiple model approaches each have their strengths and weaknesses.
Single models are limited in their focus, but when appropriately applied have more
explanatory and predictive power than an eclectic set of multiple models. On the other
hand, a multifaceted approach can be further tailored to the specific situation at hand. In
this way it can explain the situation more completely. Although its explanatory and
248
Longenecker, Galatians, CXIX.
130
predictive power suffers, as potential extrapolations become hampered by the greater
complexity and ambiguity of the model.
Take, for example, the present discussion of Galatains. Betz model of forensic
rhetoric is specific and focused. Thus, when applied to chapters 1-2 of Galatians, it
provides a powerful tool for interpreting the text. Even if Paul is not envisioning a court
scene, Betzs model allows one to draw parallels and tease out how the text was likely
received by the recipients. But Betzs model does have a limited focus, and he runs into
trouble when applying it to the rest of Galatians. On the other hand, Longenecker takes
the opposite approach, piecing together multiple models in an attempt to create a more
complete picture of Galatians. He is defiantly successful, but in doing so his work
becomes more descriptive and less explanatory. That is, his model does a good job of
describing what is found within the text, but not as good of a job at explaining why it is
there, and what its function is.
The relationship between Galatians and rhetoric has not been settled. Generally
speaking, there has been an increasing realization that the letter does not fit neatly into
any single genre of classic rhetoric. 249 Kern sums up the situation:
One cause for encouragement is that studies . . . are moving ever further
from linking Paul to classical oratory. When the link is completely broken
(or only maintained where its validity is demonstrable) the ground will be
clear for scholarship to replace attempts to uncover classical rhetoric with
efforts to describe early Christian rhetoric, first-century Jewish rhetoric
and, ultimately, Pauls rhetoric. 250
249
Longenecker, Galatians, cxix; Stanton, "Galatians," 1153. D. Francois Tolmie, Persuading the
Galatians: A Text-Centered Rhetorical Analysis of a Pauline Letter (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 233;
Philip H. Kern, Rhetoric and Galatians, ed. Richard Bauckham, Society for New Testament Studies:
Monograph Series (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 166.
250
Kern, Galatians, 165.
131
As Kern notes, Galatians is still a piece of rhetorical writing. It is attempting to persuade
its recipient. Therefore, analysis of its rhetorical nature remains a fruitful endeavor.
As already seen with Longenecker, some scholars have tried to incorporate other
models in order to get a more appropriate understanding of the letter. It is interesting to
note that some have taken the opposite approach. For example, D. Francois Tolmie looks
at the rhetoric of Galatians from within the text itself, eschewing outside models. Tolmie
argues that Galatians is a complete work of rhetoric in and of itself, and should be
analyzed as such.
I did not choose a specific rhetorical model either ancient or modern to
apply to the text. Taking the letter itself as starting-point, I endeavoured
to reconstruct Pauls rhetorical strategy from the text itself. I trust that I
succeeded in showing that one does not need to force rhetorical categories
on the letter in order to make sense of Pauls persuasive strategy. 251
Thus, while classic models of rhetoric are falling out of fashion, the field remains wide
open. Some scholars still stand by the use of classic rhetoric. Some look to other
contemporary literary genres. Others use modern models of rhetoric, and some shun
outside models all together. The nature of Galatians rhetoric is far from settled.
Finally, it is important to see how this work, with SIT, is similar to and distinct
from previous studies of Galatians rhetoric. As for the similarities, SIT defiantly sheds
light on Pauls rhetoric. For example, it helps one understand the impact that Pauls
portrayal of Abraham had on its recipients, and helps one understand why Paul chose to
discuss Abraham in the first place.
Additionally, the application of SIT is akin to Betzs use of a single model; it has
a limited application and many aspects of the text remain unexplained. Thus, issues that
do not relate directly to SIT (i.e. uncertainty reduction, prototypicality, superordinate
251
Tolmie, Persuading the Galatians, 233.
132
identity) fall outside the scope of this study. For example, SIT does little to illuminate the
elements mentioned in 4:3, or the illness Paul faced in 4:12-15. 252 These limitations are
critical, as one of the easiest mistakes to make is apply ones model where it does not
belong.
In addition to these similarities, my approach here is different from traditional
rhetorical study in some key ways. First, the analysis does not depend on Pauls own
theology to the same extent as traditional rhetorical analysis. For example, in relation to
SIT, the exact meaning of being justified by faith is not nearly as important as the fact
that Paul is redefining the group in terms of (ones of faith). The
manipulation of the group can be studied apart from some of the unresolved, complex
theological issues that plague the text.
Second, the SIT is more universally oriented. Stemming from social psychology,
it applies to everyone. It is not dependent upon a particular historical situation or ancient
school of thought. This makes it easier to apply to the text, as issues of education level,
social background, and cultural practice become less important. It also allows one to
make comparisons between Pauls writings and other historically disconnected situations.
For example, one could use Paul as one example of early forming of a religion, and use
SIT to compare it to other religious movements.
Finally, and most critically, it explains how Pauls rhetoric is functioning on a
social psychological level. Most scholarship focuses on what the text says. The SIT
explains why the rhetoric is effective and why it was chosen. This is perhaps the least
tangible product of this approach, but I find it to be the most promising. For example, it
252
Martinus C de Boer, "The Meaning of the Phrase Ta Stoicheia Tou Kosmou in Galatians," New
Testament Studies 53, no. 2 (2007): 204-24.
133
has been known that the law was an important part of what it meant to be Jewish, but SIT
explains that this is because it is a part of the Jewish social identity. It forms a
prototypical standard, which separates the in-group from the out-group. Through
depersonalization, this prototype becomes a part of the individual. This is why the Jewish
people felt personally threatened when rulers undermined their religious practice. Thus,
SIT explains the behavior witnessed in the revolts, and why Paul tackled the law in
Galatians.
134
Chapter 7: Prototypical Behavior
The Jewish revolts shed light on some of the prototypical behaviors that defined
ancient Jewish identity. Particular issues, such as circumcision, dietary restrictions, and
proper temple worship stand out. Paul, in his attempt to redraw the groups boundaries,
must deal with these issues. Apart from circumcision, he does not address them
individually. Instead he discusses the (law) at great length.
Paul refers to the (law) 32 times in Galatians. 253 There has been a great deal
of debate over what meaning and significance Paul ascribes to the (law). 254 But its
definition is relatively straight forward. In Galatians 3:17, Paul mentions that the law
(came four hundred and thirty years later),
that is four hundred and thirty years after Abraham. This is probably connected to the
tradition that the Israelites stayed for 430 years in Egypt (Exod. 12:40), which would put
430 years between Abraham and the law received by Moses.
Furthermore, Pauls understanding of (law) is not limited to the Mosaic
Law. He also uses the term when telling the story of Abraham and his children (Gal
4:21). Outside of Galatians he uses it to refer to Isaiah (1 Cor 14:21) along with the
psalms and prophets (Rom 3:10-20). 255 Thus, the term can refer to a wide range of Jewish
tradition. Whether referring primarily to the Mosaic Law or to a broader range of Jewish
tradition, the term (law) encapsulates the Jewish identity by defining prototypical
253
Galatians: 2:16 (three times), 2:19 (two times), 2:21, 3:2, 3:5, 3:10 (two times), 3:11, 3:12, 3:13, 3:17,
3:18, 3:19, 3:21(three times), 3:23, 3:24, 4:4, 4:5, 4:21 (two times), 5:3, 5:4, 5:14, 5:18, 5:23, 6:2, 6:13
254
James D. G. Dunn, ed. Paul and the Mosaic Law (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,2001). Robert G. HamertonKelly, "Sacred Violence And "Works of Law": "Is Christ then an Agent of Sin?" (Galatians 2:17),"
Catholic Biblical Quarterly 52, no. 1 (1990): 55-75.
255
135
behavior. The codes of conduct spelled out in the (law) form an explicit prototype.
They define what a good group member is and set out the example for others to follow.
The laws role in defining Jewish identity has long been recognized. When
writing about Galatians, Jan Lambrecht writes, Pauls fight for freedom is thus certainly
a fight for a Gentile gospel which no longer contains those Jewish identity
markers. 256 The theme also arises in Romans. Richard Hays, writing about Romans 3-4,
argues that one of the key roles of the law is to mark off the elect people from other
nations. 257 Hays argues that Romans 3:29-30 addresses this, in that the very fact that
the Mosaic Law serves to identify Israel as a distinctive people disqualifies it from
serving as the basis of Gods more universal setting-right (Rechtfertigung) of all
peoples. 258 These scholars, and others, recognize that the (law) shapes the identity
of ancient Judaism. SIT places this informal understanding into a formal model. The
(law) defines Jewish identity because it defines prototypical behavior.
It is worth looking at Philip F. Eslers work, which applies SIT to the (law)
in Galatians. From Eslers point of view, the (law) is a critical arena in which
Paul struggled to establish a positive social identity for his congregations in the context of
conflict with the Israelite outgroup who were naturally determined to maintain the
integrity of their ethnic boundaries. 259 Thus, Esler focuses upon how the (law),
and Pauls alternatives, form the basis for a positive in-group/out-group comparison.
256
Jan Lambrecht, "Paul's Reasoning in Galatians 2:11-21," in Paul and the Mosaic Law, ed. James D. G.
Dunn (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 2001), 68.
257
Richard B. Hays, "Three Dramatic Roles: The Law in Romans 3-4," in Paul and the Mosaic Law, ed.
James D. G. Dunn (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 2001), 151.
258
Hays, "Three Dramatic Roles," 154.
259
136
Esler also ties this into the way in which righteousness forms a privileged
identity. 260 This is a valuable insight and it also highlights the different paths our research
took, as Esler focuses on inter-group conflict and I focus on intra-group conflict. By
looking at the groups competing with the community in Galatia, Esler is able to see how
Paul is able to establish a positive social identity. On the other hand, by looking at how
the (law) affects intra-group relationships, this work examines how these
prototypical behaviors establish group boundaries.
It is the traditional prototypical standards that the agitators in Galatia are seeking
to enforce, while Paul redefines the roll of (law) in order to allow more people to
join the in-group. It is important to note that this is an etic explanation. It explains the
situation from our modern point of view. Pauls own understanding of the situation, an
emic explanation, is dramatically different. He is defending the
(Gospel of Christ, Gal 1:7) which he received through a revelation (Gal 1:12).
Scholars have written a great deal on Pauls understanding of the (law). 261 Here
the primary focus will be etic, understanding the text in light of SIT.
260

William D. Barrick, "The New Perspective And "Works of the Law" (Gal 2:16 and Rom 3:20),"
Master's Seminary Journal 16, no. 2 (2005): 277-92; J. Marcus, "'under the Law': The Background of a
Pauline Expression," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61, no. 1 (2001): 72-83; Charles H. Talbert, "Freedom
and Law in Galatians," Ex Auditu 11 (1995): 17-28; Bruce C. Corley, "Reasoning "By Faith": Whys and
Wherefores of the Law in Galatians," Southwestern Journal of Theology 37, no. 1 (1994): 17-22; Gerald L.
Stevens, "Paul and the Law in Galatians," Theological Educator: A Journal of Theology and Ministry 50
(1994): 95-104; In-Gyu Hong, "Does Paul Misrepresent the Jewish Law? Law and Covenant in Gal 3:114," Novum Testamentum 36, no. 2 (1994): 164-82; M. Cranford, "The Possibility of Perfect Obedience:
Paul and an Implied Premise in Galatians 3:10 and 5:3," Novum Testamentum 36, no. 3 (1994): 242-58; C.
E. B. Cranfield, "'the Works of the Law' in the Epistle to the Romans," Journal for the Study of the New
Testament 43 (1991): 89-101; Andrew J. Bandstra, "The Law and Angels: Antiquities 15.136 and Galatians
3:19," Calvin Theological Journal 24, no. 2 (1989): 223-40; Pheme Perkins, "Not through the Law,"
Christian Century 106, no. 19 (1989): 587; H. W. House, "A Biblical View of Women in the Ministry:
Part 3 (of 5 Parts): The Speaking of Women and the Prohibition of the Law," Bibliotheca Sacra 145, no.
579 (1988): 301-18; K. Snodgrass, "Spheres of Influence: A Possible Solution to the Problem of Paul and
the Law," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 32 (1988): 93-113; Wayne G. Strickland,
"Preunderstanding and Daniel Fuller's Law-Gospel Continuum," Bibliotheca Sacra 144, no. 574 (1987):
261
137
SIT shows that Pauls chosen response, to emphasize faith, the spirit, and the
promise, is effective because it builds upon preexisting group prototypes. Faith, in this
case, is not a Christian concept, it is a Jewish concept. The faithfulness of the Jewish
people to God is one of their defining characteristics, and is often connected directly to
observing the law. This is most clearly seen in the figure of Abraham, who is looked at in
more detail in the next chapter. He is repeatedly praised in Jewish literature (e.g. Sir
44:19-21, Jub. 23:10, 1 Macc 2:52). He is praised both because he remains faithful to
God in the face of temptation, and because he adopts circumcision. Abrahams faith,
mentioned in Genesis 15:6, is directly connected to the covenant in Genesis 17:4-14,
which established circumcision. 262
In Judaism and in the story of Abraham the concepts of faithfulness and observing
the law are interwoven. Paul instead separates these two concepts, and emphasizes one
(faith) over the other (the law). By separating and reinterpreting preexisting group
prototypes, Paul is able to effectively shift the groups boundaries. The rhetorics
persuasive power rests less on its logical construction than on its ability to make
particular prototypes salient.
181-93; Linda L. Belleville, ""Under Law": Structural Analysis and the Pauline Concept of Law in
Galatians 3:21-4:11," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 26 (1986): 53-78; Thomas R. Schreiner,
"Paul and Perfect Obedience to the Law: An Evaluation of the View of E. P. Sanders," Westminster
Theological Journal 47, no. 2 (1985): 245-78; Wilber B. Wallis, "The Pauline Conception of the Old
Covenant," Prebyterion 4, no. 2 (1978): 71-83; Daniel P. Fuller, "Paul and the Works of the Law,"
Westminster Theological Journal 38, no. 1 (1975): 28-42; J Dwight Pentecost, "Purpose of the Law,"
Bibliotheca Sacra 128, no. 511 (1971): 227-33; C. H. Cosgrove, "The Mosaic Law Preaches Faith: A
Study in Galatians 3," Westminster Theological Journal 41, no. 1 (1978): 146-64; Nicole ChibiciRevneanu, "Leben Im Gesetz: die Paulinische Interpretation von Lev 18:5 (Gal 3:12; Rm 10:5)," Novum
Testamentum 50, no. 2 (2008): 105-19.
262
Longenecker, Galatians, 110.
138
Galatians 2:15-21
15 16 []

, ,
,
.
17
, ; . 18
, . 19
, . 20
, ,

. 21
, .
15
We, Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles, 16
knowing that a man is not justified by works of the law but through the
faith of Jesus Christ, we believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be
justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because no one
will be justified by works of the law.
17
But if while seeking to be justified in Christ we are also ourselves found

sinners, then is Christ a servant of sin? May it never be! 18 For if what I
destroyed, I again build these things, I demonstrate myself a transgressor.
19
For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live for God. I
have been crucified with Christ. 20 And I no longer live, but Christ lives in
me, and that which I now live in the flesh, I live by faith, that of the son of
God who loved me and who gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the
grace of God, for if through the law [comes] righteousness, then Christ
died for nothing.
While the immediate cause of the conflict in Galatia was mixed table fellowship,
Paul saw a looming threat that undermined ones very salvation. This can be seen in
Galatians 2:15-21, which follows immediately after the incident at Antioch. It is difficult
to determine whether the whole passage reflects Pauls conversation with Peter in
Antioch, or if only part of it does. 263 The seamlessness of the transition from the incident
263
Bruce, Galatians, 136.
139
in Antioch to the situation in Galatia speaks to the connection Paul saw between the two
events. This passage both sums up the previous conflict and prepares the way for the rest
of the letter. 264
The passage can be very difficult to interpret and features the concepts of
justification, (works of the law), and (faith of Christ). Not
to mention that it includes Pauls understanding of the (law) discussed above. The
concept of justification, expressed in Paul through the verb (to justify), the noun
(justification), and the adjective (just), is a thorny issue that has
received a lot of discussion. 265 Some people focus on the forensic character of the terms,
arguing that they refer to ones right relationship and standing with God. Others have
focused upon the ethical implications, arguing that the individual is made righteous, and
lives righteously in their life.
In fact, Pauls understanding reflects both of these positions, and is not simply
one or the other. Paul uses (to justify) forensically but his use of
(justification) and (just) have behavioral implications. 266 Pauls references to the
(works of the law) are an extension of this. First-century Judaism was not
legalistic in practice, and it would be a mistake to believe that first-century Jews spent
264
Longenecker, Galatians, 80-81; Betz, Galatians, 114.

Wiard Popkes, "Two Interpretations Of "Justification" In the New Testament: Reflections on Galatians
2:15-21 and James 2:21-25," Studia Theologica 59, no. 2 (2005): 129-46; Debbie Hunn, "Ean M in
Galatians 2:16: A Look at Greek Literature," Novum Testamentum 49, no. 3 (2007): 281-90; A. A. Das,
"Oneness in Christ: The Nexus Indivulsus between Justification and Sanctification in Paul's Letter to the
Galatians," Concordia Journal 21, no. 2 (1995): 173-86; S. K. Williams, "Justification and the Spirit in
Galatians," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 29 (1987): 91-100; C. H. Cosgrove, "Justification in
Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Reflection," Journal of Biblical Literature 106, no. 4 (1987): 653-70;
Frank J. Matera, "Galatians in Perspective: Cutting a New Path through Old Territory," Interpretation 54,
no. 3 (2000): 233-45; M. F. Bird, "Justification as Forensic Declaration and Covenant Membership: A Via
Media between Reformed and Revisionist Readings of Paul," Tyndale Bulletin 57, no. 1 (2006): 109-30; C.
A. Wanamaker, "A Case against Justification by Faith," Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 42 (1983):
37-49.
266
265
140
their time trying to earn Gods favor. 267 But the situation in Galatia has convinced Paul
that some people are arguing that the (law) is necessary for justification. Thus,
Pauls use of (works of the law) carries forensic overtones. 268
Finally, there has been great debate over the term (faith of Jesus
Christ). Some argue that it is a subjective genitive, and should be read as faith of Jesus
Christ, while others argue that it is an objective genitive, and should thus be read faith
in Jesus Christ. 269 Alongside the phrase, Paul makes explicit references to those who
believe (Rom 3:22, Gal 3:22), so I suspect that both meanings are at work in the text. 270
Through SIT, Pauls manipulation of prototypes and group boundaries becomes
clear. Interestingly, Don Garlington argues that can entail the notion of position
within or participation. 271 Thus he argues that Pauls language could entail belonging
to the arena of Torah-works. 272 If this is the case, then it lends a lot of support to the
argument that Paul is manipulating group boundaries. But it is important to recognize that
prototypical behaviors define groups regardless of whether or not they form explicit
statements of group identity. By establishing functioning guidelines for the groups
267
A. W. F. Blunt, The Episle of Paul to the Galatians (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925), 88; Paul Owen,
"The "Works of the Law" In Romans and Galatians: A New Defense of the Subjective Genitive," Journal
of Biblical Literature 126, no. 3 (2007): 572-76. For more information see: Ian W. Scott, "Common
Ground? The Role of Galatians 2.16 in Paul's Argument," New Testament Studies 53, no. 3 (2007): 42535; Martinus C de Boer, "Paul's Use and Interpretation of a Justification Tradition in Galatians 2.15-21,"
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 28, no. 2 (2005): 189-216.
268
Longenecker, Galatians, 86; G. G. Findlay, The Epistle to the Galatians (New York: A. C. Armstrong
and Son, 1888), 140-41.
269
Dennis R. Lindsay, "Works of Law, Hearing of Faith and Pistis Christou in Galatians 2:16:-3:5," StoneCampbell Journal 3, no. 1 (2000): 79-88; Charles R. Erdman, The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians
(Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1966), 60; R. Barry Matlock, "The Rhetoric of in Paul:
Galatians 2.16, 3.22, Romans 3.22, and Philippians 3.9," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 30,
no. 2 (2007): 173-203; Debbie Hunn, "Pistis Xristou in Galatians 2:16: Clarification from 3:1-6," Tyndale
Bulletin 57, no. 1 (2006): 23-33; Hung-sik Choi, "Pistis in Galatians 5:5-6: Neglected Evidence for the
Faithfulness of Christ," Journal of Biblical Literature 124, no. 3 (2005): 467-90.
270
271
Don Garlington, "Paul's "Partisan " And the Question of Justification in Galatians," Journal of
Biblical Literature 127, no. 3 (2008): 567-89.
272
Garlington, "Paul's "Partisan "," 570.
141
behavior, they form the basis for evaluating group members and distinguishing them
from outsiders. Therefore, the group remains, even if it lacks a name. In other words, the
law remains one of the defining characteristics of the group, even if Garlington is
incorrect. Furthermore, SIT shows that Pauls manipulation of the (law) amounts
to a manipulation of the groups boundaries.
Having covered the terminology used in the passage, it is important to examine
some specifics of the text. Verses 15 and 16 have been described as Pauls definition of a
Jewish Christian. 273 According to Paul, Jewish Christians (or Jewish followers of Jesus,
as I prefer) are (Jews), contrasted with (Gentiles), who seek to be justified
(by faith in Christ) and not (by works of the law). 274
For Paul, followers of Jesus are defined by their faith in Christ. It is not the (law)
that separates them from others, but their (faith).
At first glance this may seem natural. But at this point in history Christianity had
yet to separate itself from Judaism. For Christianity to be a separate religion, it needed a
distinct social identity. Pauls opponents concern for circumcision and the authorities in
Jerusalem are evidence that many Jewish followers of Jesus still felt Jewish. In terms of
SIT, they were Jewish. Here Paul undermines that, by arguing that (faith) is central
to a Jewish follower of Jesus, not the (law). 275 Don Garlington argues that vs. 1516 begins a role reversal motif found throughout Galatians. 276 SIT shows that Paul is not
simply reversing roles, he is redefining the group.
273

The reference to sinners in v. 15 probably reflects a note of irony. Longenecker, Galatians, 83.
275
Joseph B. Tyson, ""Works of Law" In Galatians," Journal of Biblical Literature 92, no. 3 (423-431):
431.
276
Don Garlington, ""Even We Have Believed": Galatians 2:15-16 Revisited," Criswell Theological
Review 7, no. 1 (2009): 3-28.
274
142
Verse 17 is notoriously difficult to interpret. I think that here Paul is answering
the natural question to arise when one is told to ignore the (law). Is not
transgressing against the (law) still a sin? If seeking to be justified in Christ leads
one to break the (law), does that mean that Christ leads people to sin?
Pauls responds in v. 18-21 by arguing that the (law) has been replaced.
Pauls language of life and death certainly has theological implications. On the other
hand, practically speaking it refers to the ways in which people live their lives. When
Paul says, , (I died to the law, so that I might live for God,
v. 19), he draws a vivid contrast between living ones life in accordance with the
(law) and living for God. The former lifestyle is according to the traditional group
prototypes and the latter demands a new set of standards. 277
He then ties this to Jesus death. The implication is that Paul is doing what Christ
did. In doing so, Paul is setting up a powerful argument. Jesus, as the founder of his
movement, quickly became a prototypical figure after his death. Indeed, the theological
and religious figure of Christ can be understood as Jesus turned prototype. At some level,
Paul understands this, and here he turns to this newly arrived standard to undermine the
devotion people held towards traditional prototypical behavior, the (law).
The power of the (law) is seen in the revolts that were sparked by its
violation. Beyond that, the simple fact that many Jews did not follow Jesus speaks to the
power of their Jewish identity, due in large part to the group boundaries provided by the
(law). Therefore, instead of simply trying to abolish the (law), he is
attempting to substitute one prototype for another, (faith). He does this by tying the
277
Scott Shauf, "Galatians 2.20 in Context," New Testament Studies 52, no. 1 (2006): 86-101.
143
powerful Jewish prototype of faithfulness to Christ, and then interpreting them in such a
way that makes them antithetical to the law.
In verse 20 Paul continues to emphasis Christ, saying ,
(I no longer live, but Christ lives in me), and
. (I live by faith, that of the
son of God who loved me and who gave himself for me). This is the beginning of a
longer section in which Paul depicts (faith) as antithetical to the (law). It is
this (faith) that Paul is attempting to establish as an alternative guideline for
prototypical behavior.
Pauls understanding of (faith) certainly had theological and religious
appeal, but the underlying persuasive force of the concept comes from using Christ to
bring a preexisting prototype, (faith), to prominence. Finally, Paul finishes this
section with an ultimatum. He writes, ,
(For if through the law [comes] righteousness, then Christ died for nothing).
Here Paul is attempting to back his opponents into a corner. If they argue that
righteousness does come from the law, then they are going against Christ, the central
prototypical figure of the Jesus movement. On the other hand, if they agree with Paul,
they undermine their position that Gentiles should follow the (law).
Thus, in Galatians 2:15-21 Paul attempts to undermine the prototypical behavior
of the Jewish community, the (law). He does this by presenting it as antithetical to
Christ, a prototypical figure, and by connecting the Jewish tradition of faithfulness to
Christ, making it the most critical prototypical standard.
144
Galatians 3:1-9
1 , ,
; 2
; 3
, ; 4
; . 5
, ;
6 ,
7 , . 8
,
9
.
1
O senseless Galatians, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was portrayed as

having been crucified, who bewitched you? 2 I wish to learn only this from
you, did you receive the spirit by works of the law, or by the hearing of
faith? 3 Are you so foolish? After beginning by the spirit are you now
perfected by the flesh? 4 Did you suffer so many things in vain, if really
indeed [it was] in vain? 5 Therefore he who supplied you with the spirit
and produced mighty deeds among you, [was it] by works of the law or by
hearing faith?
6
As Abraham believed in God, and it was credited to him as

righteousness, 7 you know then that ones of faith, these ones are sons of
Abraham. 8 And the scriptures, having foreseen that by faith God justifies
the Gentiles, previously preached the gospel to Abraham saying All the
nations will be blessed in you. 9 Thus, the ones of faith are blessed with
the faithful Abraham.
A new section begins in chapter 3 with, ,
(O senseless Galatians, who bewitched you?). 278 Pauls efforts so far to draw a
connection between (faith) and Christ are powerful. But he faces a challenge.
Pauls opponents see no problem in holding the (law), (faith), and Christ in
high regard simultaneously. These prototypes are in no way mutually exclusive. Modern
Christians have many prescriptions for proper behavior, and prohibitions against
278
Susan Grove Eastman, "The Evil Eye and the Curse of the Law: Galatians 3.1 Revisited," Journal for
the Study of the New Testament 83 (2001): 69-87.
145
behaviors such as rape and murder. These do not prevent them from valuing faith in
Christ. Similarly, an early Jewish follower of Jesus would not have seen a problem in
following the prescriptions of the law, in order to live a proper life, while believing in the
sacrifice of Christ and its power to save.
This is one of the challenges Paul seeks to address in chapter 3. He does this by
both bolstering the case for (faith) and by undermining the importance of the
(law). In this passage, Paul attempts to establish a dichotomy between
(faith) and the (law). He begins his argument with a rhetorical question, asking the
Galatians if they received the spirit (by the hearing of faith) or
(by the works of the law). It is clear that, as far as Paul is concerned, they
received the (spirit) through (faith). This is evident in verse 3 when Paul
refers to the Galatians beginnings in the (spirit).
Also apparent in verse 3 is the connection that Paul draws between (faith)
and the (spirit), and the (law) and the (flesh). In verse 5, it is
(by hearing faith) that miracles are performed and the (spirit) is
provided, not (by works of the law). Critically, the concepts of
(faith) and the (spirit) are intertwined in Pauls thinking. It is worth looking
ahead to see how they establish guidelines for prototypical behavior.
In Galatians 5:22-23, Paul says that the (spirit) produces
, , , (love, joy, peace,
patience, kindness, goodness, faith, meekness, and self control). These are the guidelines
for proper living, as Paul says in Galatians 5:25, ,
(If we live by the spirit, let us also follow the spirit). This is important
146
because it shows that Paul is emphasizing a different standard of behavior. He is not
merely advocating an intellectual belief.
Returning to chapter 3, Paul continues to establish his dichotomy. At this time he
introduces Abraham, who is a prototypical figure in Judaism. His inclusion here provides
Paul with a powerful rhetorical tool. In this passage, Paul is doing two things
simultaneously. First, he is using Abraham to emphasize a different basis for prototypical
behavior (i.e. faith and the spirit). Second, he is also redefining the Abraham prototype,
thus altering the groups boundaries. This second endeavor will be discussed in the
following chapter. Here I will focus on how Abraham gives credibility to Pauls notions
of (faith) and the (spirit).
Paul describes how Abraham had faith (, from ) in God, and
was deemed righteous because of it (v. 6). Because of this, the (ones of
faith) (are sons of Abraham, v. 7). The sons of Abraham are,
traditionally, Jews. 279 Therefore, it is shocking when Paul equates them with the
(ones of faith). If Paul had instead said that those who follow the law are the
sons of Abraham, no one would have cared. He would have been stating the obvious.
Instead, he has replaced the traditional behavioral prototype, the (law), for a
different one, (faith).
Suddenly the groups boundaries shift, becoming more inclusive. No longer
limited to those that follow the (law), the group now includes those who live by
(faith), both Jews and Gentiles. Paul continues this argument in verses 8 and 9,
arguing that the scriptures foresaw this shift in the groups prototype, or as Paul puts it,
279
147
foresaw that (by faith God justifies the Gentiles),
concluding that (the ones of faith) are blessed along with Abraham.
Galatians 3:10-14
10 ,

. 11
, 12
, . 13
,
, 14
,
.
10
For as many as are of the works of the law, are under a curse. For it has
been written, Cursed is everyone who does not abide in all that has been
written in the book of the law, to do them. 11 That by the law no one is
justified before God is clear, for The just will live by faith. 12 And the
law is not by faith, but he who does these things will live by them.
13
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become for us a
curse, for it has been written cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.
14
So that to the Gentiles the blessing of Abraham might come in Christ
Jesus, so that we might receive the promise of the spirit through faith
Now that Paul has bolstered the importance of (faith), by tying it to
Abraham, he undermines the importance of the (law). He starts by saying that
those who follow the (law) are under a curse. He then supports this position by
citing scripture (v. 10). Paul probably believed that no one was able to keep all of the law.
Thus, the law condemns everyone. 280 Again, by undermining the (law), he is
undermining the established group prototype.
In verses 11 and 12, while citing scripture to support his position, he connects
(faith) with justification, referring to Hab 2:4 with
280
Thomas R. Schreiner, "Is Perfect Obedience to the Law Possible: A Re-Examination of Galatians 3:10,"
Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27, no. 2 (1984): 160.
148
(the just will live by faith). He then argues that the (law) is not by (faith),
implying that the (law) cannot lead to justification.
In verse 13, Paul ties his argument back to Christ. Paul argues that
(Christ redeemed
us from the curse of the law, having become for us a curse). The exact meaning of the
curse is unclear. 281 But, as mentioned before, Christ is a dominant, early prototype for the
followers of Jesus. By connecting Jesus death to the proposition that the (law)
places us under a curse, he makes the proposition more difficult for his opponents to
deny.
The rhetorical argument is particularly powerful because it ties Pauls proposition
directly to the act of Jesus his followers were called to emulate. In the literal sense, many
early followers of Jesus were killed. Following the Christ prototype, they were willing to
die for their beliefs. Figuratively, Christs death represented the humility and obedience
to God that all of Jesus followers were supposed to embody. Thus, Paul is pitting
prototypes against one another. He places Christ, (faith), and the (spirit)
against the (law). Finally, in verse 14, he argues that Abrahams blessing came to
281
Normand Bonneau, "The Logic of Paul's Argument on the Curse of the Law in Galatians 3:10-14,"
Novum Testamentum 39, no. 1 (1997): 60-80; Kelli S. O'Brien, "The Curse of the Law (Galatians 3.13):
Crucifixion, Persecution, and Deuteronomy 21.22-23," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 29, no.
1 (2006): 55-76; Sigurd Grindheim, "Apostate Turned Prophet: Paul's Prophetic Self-Understanding and
Prophetic Hermeneutic with Special Reference to Galatians 3.10-12," New Testament Studies 53, no. 4
(2007): 545-65; Joel Willitts, "Context Matters: Paul's Use of Leviticus 18:5 in Galatians 3:12," Tyndale
Bulletin 54, no. 2 (2003): 105-22; Timothy G. Gombis, "The 'Transgressor' and the 'Curse of the Law': The
Logic of Paul's Argument in Galatians 2-3," New Testament Studies 53, no. 1 (2007): 81-93; Todd A.
Wilson, "'under Law' in Galatians: A Pauline Theological Abbreviation," Journal of Theological Studies
56, no. 2 (2005): 362-92; Moiss Silva, "Abraham, Faith, and Works: Paul's Use of Scripture in Galatians
3:6-14," Westminster Theological Journal 63, no. 2 (2001): 251-67; David A. Brondos, "The Cross and the
Curse: Galatians 3.13 and Paul's Doctrine of Redemption," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 81
(2001): 3-32.
149
the Gentiles in Christ, so that the promise of the (spirit) might be received
through (faith).
Galatians 3:15-18
15 ,
. 16
. ,
, . 17

. 18 ,
.
15
O brothers, I speak according to man, similarly no one sets aside or adds

to a covenant that has been confirmed by man. 16 Promises were spoken to
Abraham and to his seed. And it does not say the seeds, as concerning
many, but as concerning one, and to your seed, that is Christ. 17 I say
this, the law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not
annul the covenant previously confirmed by God, so as to abolish the
promise. 18 For if by law [one receives] the inheritance, [then it is] no
longer by a promise, but God granted it to Abraham through a promise.
In this passage Paul elaborates upon the promise mentioned in 3:14. Again, Christ
is given prominence. Paul argues that the promises made to Abrahams descendants were
made to Christ, not to Abrahams descendants in general. His line of reasoning is that the
promise was made to Abrahams seed, singular, not his seeds, plural. The argument
makes as little sense in the ancient world as it does today. The word (seed), can
refer to multiple seeds just as it can in English. Either way, Pauls intention is clear. He
is attempting to give the Christ prototype priority over the (law), by arguing that
it was presupposed 430 years earlier (v. 17). Then he again asserts the antithetical
nature of the (law) and the promise (v. 18). By arguing that the two are
incompatible, he is attempting to undermine the position of his opponents. As Jewish
150
followers of Jesus, they saw no contradiction between the (law) and the promise.
Paul disagrees, and wants to convince the Galatians to move away from the (law)
by arguing that it is incompatible with the promise.
Galatians 3:19-26
19 ; ,
, . 20
, . 21
[ ]; .
, 22
,
.
23
, 24
, 25
. 26

19
Why then the law? It was added for the sake of transgressions, until the
seed would come to whom it had been promised, having been ordained
through angels by the hand of a mediator. 20 But the mediator is not for
one [party], but God is one. 21 Then is the law against the promises of
God? May it never be! For if a law was given, being able to give life, then
righteousness really would be of the law. 22 But the scripture bound all
under sin, so that the promise of faith in Jesus Christ might be given to
those who believe.
23
Before the coming of faith we were imprisoned under the law, being
bound until the faith which was to be revealed later. 24 As a result the law
is our guardian until Christ, so that we might be justified by faith. 25 But
since the coming of faith, we are no longer under a guardian. 26 For all of
you are sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.
In this passage Paul addresses the purpose of the (law). Although Paul is
seeking to expand the groups boundaries by changing its prototypes, he cannot simply
throw the old prototypes out the window. This can be explained both as a result of
151
Pauls personal experience and in terms of SIT. Paul was, by his own account in
Galatians 1:13-14 and Philippians 3:4-6, an extremely devout Jew, fully devoted and
committed to the law before he became a follower of Jesus. Therefore, he personally
had to reconcile his new understanding of the (law) within the Jesus movement
with his past personal experience of the (law). The views expressed in this
passage and the next (Gal 4:1-7) represent one of the ways that Paul reconciled the two
positions. This personal experience gave Paul an informal understanding of how such
reconciliation would be needed by others.
According to SIT, threats to ones social identity tend to make one more
defensive and less likely to adopt alternatives. This is most clearly seen in research on
superordinate identities, which found them to be most effective when the
distinctiveness of the subgroup identity remained intact. In fact, Paul is explicitly
establishing a superordinate identity (Gal 3:27-29, discussed below). As a portion of this
endeavor, Pauls reinterpretation of the (law) faces similar challenges. Thus, he
provides a new interpretation of the (law) that maintains a special place for the
(law) in Gods plan. This allows the (law) to retain a distinctive, important
purpose, making acceptance of the laws new position more likely.
In this passage, Paul starts with the obvious question ; (Why then
the law?, v. 19). Theologically speaking, the (law) must serve some purpose. It
was given by God and defined his people for hundreds of years. This is the theological
explanation of the social scientific phenomena described above. As a group defining
prototype, the (law) remains important and cannot be easily cast aside.
152
Paul answers his own question saying, (It was
added for the sake of transgressions. v. 19). The sentence is ambiguous. It is unclear
whether Paul is saying that the (law) was added in order to make people sin
more or that the (law) was added in order to make people aware of their sin.
Both suggestions have been argued. 282 Paul most likely meant that the (law)
made people aware of their sin. This interpretation fits in more smoothly with Pauls
references to our (guardian), (guide), and (steward)
in 3:24-25 and 4:1-2. Therefore, the (law) maintains a special place in Gods plan
by making people aware of their sin. 283
This prepares the way for the (promise
of faith in Jesus Christ, v. 22). If the (law) had instead been given to make people
righteous, then Christ would no longer be needed, and the law would have been against
the promise (v. 21). Instead, ,
(the scripture bound all
under sin, so that the promise of faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who
believe).
This verse is critical for two reasons. First, it establishes a different in-group
boundary, defining the in-group as (those who believe). Second, it
gives the old in-group prototype a critical role in the creation of the new group. The
remaining verses in this passage (v. 23-26) reiterate this view. Paul sees us as being
imprisoned under the (law) until the coming (faith). Thus, the (law)
282
Daniel B. Wallace, "Galatians 3:19-20: A Crux Interpretum for Paul's View of the Law," Westminster
Theological Journal 52, no. 2 (1990): 225-45.
283
David John Lull, ""The Law Was Our Pedagogue": A Study in Galatians 3:19-25," Journal of Biblical
Literature 105, no. 3 (1986): 481-98.
153
was our (guardian). Being under the (law) is clearly portrayed
negatively, in that it is the less desirable of the two options. But this negative state is
only a temporary position, because
(since the coming of faith, we are no longer under a guardian, v. 25). Finally, in
verse 26, the new group prototype, (faith) is expressed as the new in-group
boundary, defining the (sons of God).
(For all of you are sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus).
Galatians 4:1-7
, ,
, 2
. 3 , ,
4
, , ,
, 5 ,
. 6 ,
. 7
, .
1
Now I say, for as long as the heir is a child, he is no different from a

slave, [despite] being the owner of everything, 2 he is under guides and
stewards until the time set by his father. 3 It is the same with us, when we
were children, we had been enslaved under the elements of the world. 4
But when the fullness of time came, God sent forth his son, born of a
woman, born under the law, 5 so that he might redeem those under the law,
so that we might receive sonship. 6 Because you are sons, God sent forth
the spirit of his son into our hearts, crying, Abba Father. 7 So that you
are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, also a heir through God.
In this passage, Paul continues to discuss the role of the (law). Here Paul
uses an analogy intended to clarify his position taken in the previous passage. 284 He
argues the same point from before, that the (law) was a temporary guide, to be
284
154
replaced when Christ freed those under the (law). He compares the situation to a
household, against the backdrop of Greco-Roman guardianship laws. 285 He points to out
that even though a child is an heir, and thus owns everything, he has no status or power
(v. 1). Instead he is placed under a (guide) or (steward). Eventually,
when the father feels his son is ready, he is released from this supervision (v. 2).
Paul argues that we went through the same process. Originally being
(under the law, v. 5), we were then redeemed by Christ
(so that we might receive sonship, v. 5), and are no longer (a slave but
a son, v. 7). As a clarification of the previous passage, the rhetorical purpose of this
passage is the same. It places the (law) in an important, but subservient role, thus
easing the adoption of a different group prototype.
A couple of things are worth mentioning. For one thing, Christ is
, (born under the law, so that he might redeem
those under the law, v. 4-5). Beyond establishing Christ as a transitional figure, these
versus argue that Christs position under the (law) was necessary for our
redemption. In other words, Christs adherence to the old prototype, the (law), was
a necessary precursor to the creation of the new prototype, (faith). This is critical,
as Pauls opponents could easily argue that people should follow the (law),
because Christ followed the (law). Indeed, this argument carries a lot of weight,
285
John K. Goodrich, "Guardians, Not Taskmasters: The Cultural Resonances of Paul's Metaphor in
Galatians 4.1-2," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 32, no. 3 (2010): 251-84. For further
information see: Norman H. Young, "The Figure of the Paidagogos in Art and Literature," Biblical
Archaeologist 53, no. 2 (1990): 80-86; Anthony T. Hanson, "The Origin of Paul's Use of Paidagogos for
the Law," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 34 (1988): 71-76; Norman H. Young, "Paidagogos:
The Social Setting of a Pauline Metaphor," Novum Testamentum 29, no. 2 (1987): 150-76; Michael J.
Smith, "The Role of the Pedagogue in Galatians," Biliotheca Sacra 163, no. 650 (2006): 197-214; Richard
N. Longenecker, "The Pedagogical Nature of the Law in Galatians 3:19-4:7," Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 25, no. 1 (1982): 53-61.
155
particularly among Jewish followers of Jesus, as it combines two powerful prototypes.
Pauls argument here counters this line of reasoning by arguing that Christs submission
to the (law) was only a prerequisite for things to come.
It is also worth mentioning that the new group boundaries are reaffirmed in verses
6-7. God sends (the spirit of his son) so that we can be a
(son) and an (heir through God). This imitates the language of
3:26, where we are (sons of God).
Pauls Final Position

The texts discussed above, from the end of chapter 2 to the beginning of chapter
4, form the heart of Pauls argument against the (law). This is not all that he has to
say on the subject in Galatians. In the last two chapters of Galatians he reiterates his
position multiple times. For example, in 5:4-5 Paul declares, ,
, .
(You were estranged from Christ, you who would be
justified by the law, you fell from grace. For we look forward, with the spirit and by faith,
to the hope of righteousness). Here Paul again established the law as antithetical to the
(spirit) and (faith). This is a continuation of the shift in prototypical
behavior discussed above.
Additionally, in the final chapters Paul also encapsulates his view of (faith)
and the (spirit) as more appropriate guidelines for prototypical behavior.
Galatians 5:22-25, which discusses the fruits of the spirit and calls us to live by them, was
discussed above. Furthermore, it is worth noting that the passage was probably written in
156
response to claims that living without the law would lead to immoral behavior. In 5:13
Paul cautions, ,
, (For you were called for
freedom, O Brothers, only not freedom as a pretext for the flesh, but through love serve
one another). This, along with 5:22-25, demonstrates Pauls view of (faith) and the
(spirit) as carrying a moral obligation to live well. 286
In other words, the concepts of (faith) and the (spirit) carry
prescriptions for appropriate behavior. Critically, this is necessary if they are going to set
the different standard for prototypical behavior. Paul continues in verse 14,
, (For the
whole law has been summed up in one word, in the [saying], love your neighbor as
yourself). The Golden Rule is known well enough, and simply reinforces the previous
point. More importantly, the essence of the (law) has been reinterpreted. This
allows the (law) to be incorporated into the new standards for living proposed by
Paul. As seen earlier when Paul argued that the (law) was our guardian until
Christ, arguing that the new prototype encapsulates the old prototype protects the special
and distinct status of the (law). This makes the adoption of the new prototype more
likely.
Then, in 6:2, Paul once again puts for the new standard for behavior,
(Bear one anothers
286
Peter Mageto, "Toward an Ethic of Shared Responsibility in Galatians 5:13-15," Evangelical Review of
Theology 30, no. 1 (2006): 80; G. M. H. Loubser, "Life in the Spirit as Wise Remedy for the Folly of the
Flesh: Ethical Notes from Galatians," Neotestamentica 43, no. 2 (2009): 354-71.
157
burdens and thus you will fulfill the law of Christ). This phrase, the law of Christ, is
critical. Richard Hays, in commenting on this phrase, says:
Pauls ethical exhortations are grounded in Christological warrants:
Christology supplies not only the presuppositions of the Christians
existential situation but also the pattern for Christian conduct. Pauls
ethical directives to the Galatians presuppose a particular understanding of
Jesus Christ as a paradigm for the life of the Christian believer and to do
justice to the full scope of Pauls vision for the life of the community in
Christ. 287
In other words, Christ is a prototypical figure. Thus (the law of
Christ) represents the new standard for prototypical behavior, which is derived from
Christ.
As an extension of this, Paul later mentions the
(household of faith). This is clearly how Paul defines the new group, as those who are
faithful. Finally, and dramatically, in 6:15-16 Paul writes,
. 16 ,
(For neither circumcision nor
uncircumcision is anything, but a new creation. And as many as will follow this rule,
peace and mercy upon them and upon the Israel of God). His reference to
(the Israel of God) is very odd. It is a phrase that is absent from both Pauls other
letters and contemporary literature of the time. But it is clear that Paul is redefining the
groups boundaries. Israel is no longer defined as those who keep the law, but those who
follow this new standard.
287
Richard B. Hays, "Christology and Ethics in Galatians: The Law of Christ," Catholic Biblical Quarterly
49, no. 2 (1987): 273.
158
Chapter 8: Prototypical Figures

The previous chapter looked at the group prototype, as represented by guidelines
for prototypical behavior. Prototypes are also represented by ideal, often hypothetical,
group members. These prototypes follow the metacontrast principle, maximizing
intragroup similarities and intergroup differences. Thus, they are normally extra-ordinary,
representing the best of what the group has to offer. 288 For example, Gandhi and Nelson
Mandela have become prototypical figures for many groups pursuing civil rights and
social justice. They are extra-ordinary members of the social justice movement, and are
seen as ideal group members. Thus they become prototypes for the group, and are used as
a standard by which other group members are measured.
Prototypical figures are not always so rooted in history. The most famous
example of this is the saying What would Jesus do?. Jesus is the Christian prototype.
Jesus is the ideal Christian and his theoretical actions serve as a guideline for proper
Christian behavior. Notably, while a man named Jesus lived and was crucified
approximately two thousand years ago, the Jesus behind What would Jesus do? is an
interpolation. It is the Jesus of faith (myth, legend, theology, etc.) that serves as the
groups prototype. Indeed, the prototype would still stand even if the historical person
Jesus had never existed.
In this same way, the figure of Abraham, which Paul manipulates in Galatians, is
a prototype for the Jewish identity. The historicity of Abraham is irrelevant; the character
of Abraham still represents the ideal Jew. Just as religions often explicitly lay out their
288
159
prescriptions for prototypical behavior, they often explicitly lay out their prototypical
figures. This makes them ideally suited for study under the SIT.
In Galatians, Abraham is one of the central features of Pauls argument. 289 Paul
changes the image of Abraham, a prototypical figure, in order to change the groups
boundaries. He makes Abrahams character reflect the lives of the Gentile followers of
Jesus in Galatia. Thus he shifts the groups boundaries, making the group more inclusive
and more tolerant of Gentile membership.
Abraham
Abrahams role as the prototypical Jew can be seen in the way he is portrayed in
various texts. For example, take Sirach 44:19-21, written sometime in the second century
B.C.E. 290
Abraham, the father of a multitude of nations, Tarnished not his glory;
Who kept the commandment of the most High, And entered into a
covenant with Him: In his flesh He engraved him an ordinance, And in
trial he was found faithful. Therefore with an oath He promised him To
bless the nations in his seed, To multiply him as the dust of the earth,
And to exalt his seed as the stars; To cause them to inherit from sea to
sea, And from the River to the ends of the earth. 291
This high praise can also be seen in Jubilees 23:10, For Abraham was perfect in all his
deeds with the Lord, and well-pleasing in righteousness all the days of his life. 292 And
289
Scott Hahn, "Covenant, Oath, and the Aqedah: Diathk in Galatians 3:15-18," Catholic Biblical
Quarterly 67, no. 1 (2005): 79-100; David M. Rhoads, "Children of Abraham, Children of God:
Metaphorical Kinship in Paul's Letter to the Galatians," Currents in Theology and Mission 31, no. 4
(2004): 282-97.
290
W. O. E. Oesterley and G. H. Box, "Sirach," in Apocrypha of the Old Testament, ed. R. H. Charles
(Bellingham: Logos Research Systems, 2004).
291
Oesterley and Box, "Sirach."
292
Charles, "Jubilees."
160
also in 1 Maccabees 2:52 Was not Abraham found faithful in temptation, and it was
reckoned unto him for righteousness?. 293
Abraham is praised for two things. First, he remains faithful to God in the face of
temptation. Second, he adopts circumcision. These two points are repeatedly emphasized
within Jewish literature. 294 Abrahams faith, mentioned in Genesis 15:6, is directly
connected to the covenant in Genesis 17:4-14 that established circumcision. 295 In
addition to the trials he overcomes, Abrahams faithfulness is expressed through
circumcision, the very practice that Paul is fighting against in Galatia. This is because in
Judaism, to be faithful to God is to be obedient to the law.
The antithetical relationship between faithfulness and the law that Paul attempts
to establish in Galatians runs counter to traditional Jewish thinking. Abraham, as
traditionally represented, reflects the intertwining of faithfulness and the law. In fact,
later Jewish writings, which post-date Christianity, elaborate on this connection. This is
seen in the Midrash Rabbah, particularly in the Leviticus Rabbah 2.10 where the author
argues that Abraham anticipated and kept the whole Torah, as evidenced by his
circumcision and the sacrifice he offered in the Binding of Isaac (Gen. 22:13). 296
In light of these traditions, it is understandable that Paul would integrate Abraham
into his discussion of the (law). It is not simply that the traditional depiction of
Abraham undermines Pauls argument concerning the (law). It is that they are both
representations of the groups prototype. Abraham embodies the prototypical
293

Richard N. Longenecker, ""Faith of Abraham" Theme in Paul, James and Hebrews: A Study in the
Circumstantial Nature of New Testament Teachings," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 20,
no. 3 (1977): 204.
295
296
294
161
prescriptions laid out in the (law). Abraham was not the only Jewish prototype
(e.g. Moses, David), but there were good rhetorical reasons for choosing Abraham over
the others. Abraham reportedly lived before the (law), he was known for
faithfulness, and he was seen as the father of the Jewish people. All of these reasons
make him fit well within Pauls argument. The examination here will focus on how
Abraham reflects the groups prototype, and how Pauls manipulation of Abrahams
character is designed to shift the groups boundaries, allowing for the admittance of
Gentiles.
Before examining the text, it is worth looking at how Eslers use of SIT views
Pauls use of Abraham. Esler views Pauls manipulation of Abraham in much the same
way that he viewed Pauls manipulation of the (law). Esler argues that Paul is
creating a positive social identity that is pitted against the Israelite identity, an inter-group
interaction. Because of this, he is concerned with how Abraham and the (law)
establish a positive inter-group comparison. Thus he speaks of righteousness as
privileged identity. 297 In a later article, Esler continues this interpretation of Pauls use
of Abraham. 298
Righteousness, in this view, reflects a positive inter-group comparison. It
positively distinguishes the in-group from its out-group competitors. Thus, Esler sees
manipulations of the (law) and Abraham as attempts to gain this privileged
position. He sees the situation in terms of social competition, which derives from SIT
and posits that subordinate groups may seek to change their status by altering the inter-
297

Philip Francis Esler, "Paul's Contestation of Israel's (Ethnic) Memory of Abraham in Galatians 3,"
Biblical Theology Bulletin 36, no. 1 (2006): 23-34.
298
162
group comparison in relevant ways. 299 For example, in dealing with racism (a negative
inter-group comparison) African-Americans can improve their social status by shifting
the point of comparison, emphasizing positive aspects of their social identity, such as
their contributions to jazz, the blues, sports, civil rights, social justice, etc. Esler sees a
similar shift taking place in Galatians.
This is precisely Pauls position as far as righteousness is concerned. His
opponents are arguing that the dominant Israelite group will provide for
any who will join them through circumcision and acceptance of the
Mosaic law that prestigious asset called righteousness. Paul counters this
claim head-on by arguing that righteousness belongs with the
congregations of Christ-followers, not with the Israelites. 300
Thus, Paul is connecting the Gentiles to Abraham so that they can improve their status
and share in righteousness.
Esler sees this connection dramatically proclaimed in Galatians 3:7, when Paul
declares , (you know then that
ones of faith, these ones are sons of Abraham).
They share an identity of kinship with this illustrious hero from the past.
In terms of social identity theory setthis suggestion constitutes an
excursion into social creativity, an attempt by a subordinate in-group to
improve its actual social location vis--vis the dominant out-group with
respect to their respective access to scarce resources and status. Paul is
trying to reverse the position of the two groups on the salient dimension of
Abrahamic ancestry. 301
Kinship was a powerful force in the ancient world, and such a declaration was not taken
lightly. 302
My approach here differs, but does not disagree with Eslers interpretation.
Certainly Paul is attempting to portray followers of Christ who do not practice the
299

301
302
Malina, The New Testament World, 117-48.
300
163
(law) in positive way. He is laying the groundwork for the emergence of a new social
identity (Christian), which will view itself positively when compared to relevant outgroups (e.g. Jews, Romans). Additionally, to whatever extent such a social identity
already existed, the observations are applicable to Galatia.
In contrast, my approach views the situation in terms of an intra-group conflict.
As such, both the (law) and Abraham represent group prototypes that must be
altered in order to allow for the acceptance of Gentiles by the group. The power of
Eslers approach lies in its ability to examine the new inter-group interactions that
emerge as Paul begins to create a new and distinct social identity. The power of my
approach lies in its ability to illuminate Pauls use of traditional Jewish prototypes.
Paul could have left Judaism behind and tried to form an entirely new identity, an
approach that could have been successful among a Gentile audience. Instead he focuses
his efforts on shaping the Jewish identity, and applying it in a new way to the followers
of Christ. The applicability of both approaches rests on the fact that the difference
between Christianity as a transformed Jewish identity, and Christianity as a completely
new social identity, depends simply upon how many people accept the change. That is, if
all Jews had followed Jesus, then what we call Christianity would be called Judaism.
Galatians 3:6-9
6 ,
7 , . 8
,
9
.
6
As Abraham believed in God, and it was credited to him as

righteousness, 7 you know then that ones of faith, these ones are sons of
164
Abraham. 8 And the scriptures, having foreseen that by faith God justifies
the Gentiles, previously preached the gospel to Abraham saying All the
nations will be blessed in you. 9 Thus, the ones of faith are blessed with
the believing Abraham.
Here Paul introduces Abraham into his arguments. By this point in Galatians Paul
has already begun establishing the antithetical nature of the (law) and
(faith). Chapter 2 emerges from the incident at Antioch to end on this dichotomy, and the
beginning of chapter 3 continues this point, paving the way for Abrahams introduction in
verse 6. Although there is a transition in 3:1-5, the argument of verse 6 ties directly into
the last verse of chapter 2, verse 21,
, . (I do not set aside the grace of God, for if
through the law [comes] righteousness, then Christ died for nothing). Paul is using
Abraham as an example to support his argument in chapter 2.
Verse 6 is nearly an exact quote of Genesis 15:6 in the LXX. Thus Paul is using
an established Jewish example to support his view. But to stop at this point risks missing
the bigger picture. While it is tempting to say that Paul is simply adopting an appropriate
example to support his view, such a position doesnt account for the fact that Abraham,
traditionally understood, does not support Pauls argument.
Abraham, as discussed above, was a Jewish prototype. As such he embodied
proper living and adherence to Gods commandments. Even if one were to argue that the
Torah had not yet been received, as Paul does, Abraham received the covenant of
circumcision (Gen 17:9-14)! Also, Abrahams faith was intricately tied to his obedience
to Gods commandments. The traditional view of Abraham works against Paul, not for
165
him. This discrepancy, between the traditional view of Abraham and Pauls
reinterpretation has not gone unnoticed by scholars. 303
SIT provides new insights into how Pauls manipulation of Abraham allows him
to shape the groups identity. But it is important to draw a distinction between the explicit
theological argument that Paul is making and the prototype manipulation that lies behind
it. Paul argues that those who have faith are sons of Abraham because Abraham believed
in God, and was deemed righteous. Then Paul supports his position with an appeal to
scripture. He notes that Abraham is told all nations will be blessed by him. Therefore,
Paul reasons, the scripture foresaw the coming justification of the Gentiles. The logic is
clearer in the Greek, where the same word is used to refer to both the Gentiles and the
nations, . Thus, Abraham blesses those of faith.
On the other hand, according to SIT, there are three prototypes at work here,
Abraham, (faith), and the (law). Two are explicit and one is notably absent.
Paul begins in verse 6 by emphasizing Abrahams belief, and continues in verse 7
declaring that , (ones of faith, these ones are sons
of Abraham). The phrase (ones of faith) speaks to a new set of group
boundaries. As discussed in the previous chapter, Paul is defining the group in terms of
(faith) instead of the (law).
303
Betz, Galatians, 139-40; Longenecker, Galatians, 110-12; Jeremy Punt, "Subverting Sarah in the New
Testament: Galatians 4 and 1 Peter 3," Scriptura 96 (2007): 453-68; Jeremy Punt, "Revealing Rereading.
Part 2: Paul and the Wives of the Father of Faith in Galatians 4:21-5:1," Neotestamentica 40, no. 1 (2006):
101-18; Jeremy Punt, "Revealing Rereading. Part 1: Pauline Allegory in Galatians 4:21-5:1,"
Neotestamentica 40, no. 1 (2006): 87-100. For further information see: H Wayne Johnson, "The Paradigm
of Abraham in Galatians 3:6-9," Trinity Journal 8, no. 2 (1987): 179-99; D. E. Garland, "Paul's Defense of
the Truth of the Gospel Regarding Gentiles (Galatians 2:15-3:22)," Review and Expositor 91, no. 2 (1994):
165-81; Stephen E. Fowl, "Who Can Read Abraham's Story? Allegory and Interpretive Power in
Galatians," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 55 (1994): 77-95; Frank J. Matera, "Galatians and
the Development of Paul's Teaching on Justification," Word & World 20, no. 3 (2000): 243-44; Karol
Gabris, "Zur Kraft der Verheissungen : zum Gal 3:15-22," Communio Viatorum 11, no. 4 (1968): 251-64;
Raik Heckl, "Ein Bezugstext Fr Gal 3:21b," Novum Testamentum 45, no. 3 (2003): 260-64.
166
Here Paul is using this shift in prototypical behavior in conjunction with a change
to the prototypical figure of Abraham. He does this by equating a previously exclusive
group, the sons of Abraham, with a more inclusive prototype, (ones of
faith). This changes the image of Abraham and his descendants, changing the prototype.
Paul is also using Abraham to support his new interpretation of the (law)
and (faith). In verse 8 Paul builds upon the equivocation between the
(ones of faith) and the sons of Abraham by referring back to scripture. The blessing
mentioned in verse 8 appears multiple times in Genesis and elsewhere. 304 For Paul the
blessing anticipates the justification of the Gentiles by faith. Here, Paul uses this view of
the Abraham prototype to support his reinterpretation of the (law), by arguing that
the Abraham prototype supports a (faith) based behavioral prototype. Conversely,
Pauls understanding of (faith) shapes his interpretation of the biblical account of
Abraham.
Finally, in verse 9 Paul again mentions the (ones of faith),
connecting them to Abraham. The preposition (with) stresses the connection between
the (ones of faith) and Abraham. Additionally, (believing) is an
adjective and should be understood in an active sense. 305 Paul is creating a powerful
connection between his community and the reinterpreted prototype of Abraham,
concluding that (the ones of faith are
blessed with the believing Abraham).
This passage illustrates one of the most difficult issues surrounding the Abraham
prototype, the circular nature of Pauls reasoning. Paul is both using Abraham to support
304
305
Longenecker, Galatians, 115. Gen. 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14; Ps 71:17; Sir 44:21
167
his reinterpretation of (faith) and reinterpreting Abraham in light of his new
understanding of (faith) and the (law). This was less of an issue with the
(law) because Paul often talks about the (law) in Galatians without
referencing Abraham, and will be less of an issue below when Paul talks about Abraham
without mentioning the (law).
Here, on the other hand, Abrahams relationship with (faith) and the
(law) is repeatedly emphasized. The circular nature of the argument arises out of the fact
that Paul is changing both prototypes simultaneously. Just as they are intertwined in
traditional Jewish thought, they are also intertwined in Pauls thought. Changes in one
necessitate changes in the other. In other words, Paul would like to change his audiences
attitude towards the (law) as well as change their understanding of Abraham. He is
attempting to do both simultaneously. As a result the two concepts are often interwoven,
making it difficult to determine which is supporting the other.
Galatians 3:13-14
13
, ,
14 ,
.
13
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become for us a
curse, for it has been written cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree. 14
So that to the Gentiles the blessing of Abraham might come in Christ
Jesus, so that we might receive the promise of the spirit through faith.
After declaring that the (law) puts everyone under a curse and that the just
will live by (faith) in 3:10-12, Paul brings the discussion back to Abraham. It is
important to distinguish between the theological argument that Paul makes, and what his
168
writings tell us about the newly defined prototype of Abraham. Theologically, Paul
continues to support his claim that , (ones of faith,
these ones are sons of Abraham). In Pauls view, the (law) is a curse, which Christ
has lifted by taking it upon himself. Paul argues that by doing this Christ allows the
blessing of Abraham to come to the Gentiles. 306 This was done so that people could
receive the spirit through faith. 307
From the perspective of SIT, it is clear that the strength of Pauls argument rests
upon the interaction of four different group prototypes, Christ, Abraham, the (law),
and (faith). As discussed above, Paul pits the prototype of Christ and the prototype
of the (law) against one another. This helps to portray the (law) negatively
by appealing to the most prominent prototype within the early Jesus movement. This is
juxtaposed with (the promise of the spirit) that we
receive (through faith), which is seen both positively and as an extension
of the Christ prototype.
Additionally, Paul incorporates Abraham, specifically (the
blessing of Abraham) that comes to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus. The positive connection
between Abraham and Christ is clear. This is functionally the reverse of the relationship
established between Christ and the (law). While Paul makes the (law)
antithetical to Christ, he makes (the blessing of Abraham)
306
A. J. M. Wedderburn, "Some Observations on Paul's Use of the Phrases "In Christ" And "With Christ","
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 25 (1985): 89.
307
For further information see: S. K. Williams, "Promise in Galatians: A Reading of Paul's Reading of
Scripture," Journal of Biblical Literature 107, no. 4 (1988): 709-20; Joseph P. Braswell, ""The Blessing of
Abraham" Versus "The Curse of the Law": Another Look at Gal 3:10-13," Westminster Theological
Journal 53, no. 1 (1991): 73-91; Jan Lambrecht, "Abraham and His Offspring: A Comparison of Galatians
5,1 with 3,13," Biblica 80, no. 4 (1999): 525-36.
169
complimentary to Christ. The Christ prototype supports and shapes Pauls understanding
of Abraham.
The second cause of verse 14 completes the thought, and thus connects
(the blessing of Abraham) with (the promise
of the spirit) that we receive (through faith). The prototype of Abraham
is positively tied to the newly established prototype of (faith). Overall, Paul
continues to reshape the Abraham prototype. He ties him positively to (faith) and
Christ while at the same time distancing him from the (law). As before, Paul is
reinterpreting the (law) and Abraham simultaneously. Pauls image of Abraham
both supports his position on the (law) and is shaped by it. Prototypical figures
embody the ideals of the group and represent the ideal group member. By shifting the
values and ideals associated with Abraham, Paul is changing the image of the ideal group
member.
Galatians 3:15-16
15 ,
. 16
. ,
, .
15
O brothers, I speak according to man, similarly no one sets aside or adds

to a covenant that has been confirmed by man. 16 Promises were spoken to
Abraham and to his seed. And it does not say the seeds, as concerning
many, but as concerning one, and to your seed, that is Christ.
In order to fully understand how Paul is changing the Abraham prototype in this
passage and the ones that follow, one has to look at the concepts of (covenant)
and (seed). A great deal of effort has gone into understanding Pauls use of the
170
term (covenant). One common meaning for the term was will or testament.
Josephus, who was a contemporary of Pauls, uses the word 32 times in his writing. In
each case it means will or testament, and never covenant. On the other hand, the
term is consistently used in the LXX, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, to
translate the theologically significant Hebrew term brt (covenant). It is used 270 out of
286 times. 308 The LXX was certainly available to Paul. As seen above, he often uses
quotations or near quotations in his writing. The context surrounding the three uses of
(covenant) in Galatians (3:15, 3:17, and particularly 4:24 discussed below) show
that its use in the LXX had a large influence upon Pauls understanding of the term.
The context behind Pauls statement,
(I speak according to man,
similarly no one sets aside or adds to a covenant that has been confirmed by man), is less
clear. This sentence has prompted many scholars to look for the legal example that Paul
has in mind. The problem, simply put, is that the most common wills and testaments were
changed and nullified. A great deal of work has been done, searching for examples of
wills that were irrevocable. A few cases have been found, in which a person wills his
possessions to another while he is still alive. Under such circumstances, it was impossible
for the person to take back the property from their heir.309 Ultimately it is unclear what
Paul had in mind. He could have been thinking of these specific contracts, he could have
had in mind wills after the death of their creator, or he may have been thinking of the
308
309

Betz, Galatians, 154-56; Longenecker, Galatians, 128-30.
171
general obligation to honor wills. In any case, his argument is clear. Once a testament has
been ratified, no one may change it or cancel it. 310
The meaning of (seed) is more straightforward. Though singular in form,
the word was thought of as referring to multiple descendants. Think of the word seed in
English, which can refer to many seeds. Or, more appropriately, the English word sperm,
which derives from (sperma), and functions in the same way. In Judaism the
seed in the promise of Abraham was always understood to refer to all of his
decedents, excluding only those born of Ishmael and Esau. Pauls interpretation goes
directly against Jewish tradition. 311
In the Talmud there are three examples of arguments based upon the plural or
singular form of a noun, and there are a few cases where rabbis argue that it refers to
Isaac, a position they take in an attempt to reconcile the 400 years between covenants
of Genesis 15:13 and the 430 years in Exodus 12:40. 312 Thus, Pauls interpretation of
(seed) here as referring to a single individual is not without its parallel. 313 But
Pauls interpretation clearly goes against the general Jewish understanding of his day,
and does not seem to be based upon any specific tradition of thought.
Indeed, in verse 29 Paul uses (seed), in the singular, to refer to a
collective group of people. Similarly, he uses it in the same way in Romans 4:13-18
when referring to Abraham and his promise. Therefore, his use of it here is very
specific, not only within the context of Jewish tradition, but also within Pauls own
310

R. A. Pyne, "The 'Seed,' the Spirit, and the Blessing of Abraham," Bibliotheca Sacra 152 (1995): 21122.
312
313
C John Collins, "Galatians 3:16: What Kind of Exegete Was Paul?," Tyndale Bulletin 54, no. 1 (2003):
75-86.
311
172
writings. The key to understanding this idiosyncratic usage is in recognizing how it
attempts to shape the groups identity.
In verses 15-16 there are two prototypes at work, Abraham and Christ, as well as
one group designation, (seed). It is important to recognize that the concept of
the (seed) is inextricably connected to the prototype of Abraham. As mentioned
before, it refers to Abrahams descendants, and in doing so is used to designate the
Jewish people. Therefore, Pauls manipulation of its meaning not only has a direct
impact upon the groups boundaries, but also changes the prototype of Abraham. It
intentionally casts Abraham in a new light, redefining the group that Abraham
represents.
In these verses Pauls intention is clear. He is attempting to change the way his
audience understands Abraham, and thus shift his audiences understanding of the
group. He does this by connecting two powerful prototypes. He ties together Christ and
Abraham, and in doing so is placing Christ at the center of the Jewish identity. These
verses are particularly useful because they provide the clearest example of Paul
shaping the Abraham prototype. He takes one of the defining characteristics of the
prototype, Abrahams (seed), and redefines it. This is critical because it shows
Paul consciously shaping both the Abraham prototype and the (law) prototype.
In the previous passage Paul was manipulating the (law) and Abraham
simultaneously. This left open the possibility that Pauls new Abraham was simply the
byproduct of a new understanding of the (law). But Pauls reasoning here represents a
deliberate manipulation of the Abraham prototype. This is also seen in Galatians 4:2131, discussed below.
173
Galatians 3:17-18
17

. 18 ,
.
17
I say this, the law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does
not annul the covenant previously confirmed by God, so as to abolish the
promise. 18 For if by law [one receives] the inheritance, [then it is] no
longer by a promise, but God granted it to Abraham through a promise.
Verses 17-18 complete the thought started in 16-17. In short, Paul is using his
new understanding of Abraham to undermine the traditional understanding of the
(law). The explicit argument of verses 17-18 is fairly straightforward. The law, another
covenant, does not annul the one previously established, just as Paul says in verse 15,
(no one sets aside or
adds to a covenant that has been confirmed by man). Moreover, the (law) must not
be able to provide an inheritance, because if it did, then Gods promise to Abraham (v.
16) would be nullified. In effect, the second clause of verse 18 clarifies verse 16.
Apparently, the promise that was given to Abraham and Christ was one of inheritance.
This explains the reasoning behind verse 18, which says that inheritance received through
the (law) would nullify Gods promise.
It is important to see how Pauls new understanding of Abraham functions in his
argument here. In Pauls view, Abraham received righteousness though faith (v. 6) and
blesses others through his faith (v. 9). His blessing comes in Christ Jesus and the spirit
comes through faith (v. 14). Finally, promises made to Abraham, whether for the spirit
(v. 14) or the inheritance (v. 18), were made to Abraham and Christ (v. 16), thus tying
Abrahams blessing to Christ and by association to those who follow him.
174
This understanding of Abraham is dramatically different from the traditional view
presented above. Traditionally, Abraham was revered both for his faithfulness and his
obedience. He received the covenant of circumcision and his life was thought to
foreshadow the law to come. If this traditional view of Abraham is applied to the
situation, then the arguments of verses 17-18 fall apart. The (law), appearing 430
years later does not nullify the previous covenant, which is circumcision, it complements
it. The inheritance does not come through a promise, as in v. 18b, instead it comes from
the (law).
In contrast, Pauls Abraham supports his arguments well, and he is uses it to
diminish the importance of the (law). Abraham, and the promise he represents,
prevent the (law) from providing us with an inheritance because if it did, the prior
covenant of Gods promise would be undone (v. 17-18). This line of reasoning raises a
natural question. What is the laws purpose? This is exactly the issue Paul tackles in v.
19-26, which was discussed in the previous chapter. Thus, Pauls new Abraham paves the
way for his new understanding for the role of the (law). The concept of inheritance,
introduced in v. 18, becomes a central feature of his argument in the coming verses that
relegates the role of the law to that of temporary Guardian.
Galatians 3:29
29 , ,
.
29
If you are of Christ, then you are from the seed of Abraham, heirs,
according to the promise.
175
While not Pauls final word on the subject, this verse encapsulates his position.
The verse completes Pauls famous statement of subordinate identity in verse 28, which
will be discussed in the next chapter. Although the verse is short, it is densely packed. It
has two prototypical figures (Christ and Abraham), two group designations (Abrahams
seed and heirs), and a mention of the promise. The power of this verse comes from its
ability to tie the preceding concepts together in an explicit declaration of the equivalence
between being a follower of Christ and being Abrahams descendent.
Previously, Paul mentions the (ones of faith), who are sons of
Abraham (v. 7), and are blessed with the believing Abraham (v. 9). Here, those who are
of Christ are substituted for the (ones of faith). This is a bold statement,
which flows out of the connection drawn between Abrahams seed and Christ in 3:16. At
this point, the discussion has moved passed a debate over the nature of Abrahams
faithfulness.
While somewhat speculative, it is easy to image the agitators agreeing that the
(ones of faith) are sons of Abraham. Indeed, Abraham was known for his
faithfulness to God. The point of disagreement would then have been over the nature of
this faithfulness. While Paul describes it as living in the spirit (5:18), they may have
argued that it was best expressed in fulfilling the Law. Thus, the phrase
(ones of faith) is less directly confrontational than (you of Christ).
Here, such room for interpretation is no longer present. The seeds of Abraham,
the heirs, are followers of Christ. 314 Just as before, Paul is taking the central prototypical
figure of the Jesus movement, Christ, and placing it at the forefront. In this statement,
314
H. C. Waetjen, "The Trust of Abraham and the Trust of Jesus Christ: Romans 1:17," Currents in
Theology and Mission 30, no. 6 (2003): 452-53.
176
Christ not only defines the group, he defines the seed of Abraham. By doing so, the
Christ prototype redefines Abraham himself. It is not coincidental that this statement
comes after one of the strongest statements of identity found in the NT.
Galatians 4:21-23
21 , , ; 22
,
. 23 ,
.
21
Tell me, those who desire to be under the law, do you not listen to the
law? 22 For it has been written that Abraham had two sons, one from a
maidservant and one from a freewoman. 23 However, on the one hand the
one of the maidservant has been born according to flesh, on the other hand
the one of the freewoman [has been born] through a promise.
The story of Abraham and the birth of his sons can be found in Gensis 16:1-16,
and 21:1-21. Abraham is having trouble conceiving a child with his wife Sarah. Sarah
urges Abraham to go and conceive with her maid, Hagar. Hagar then has Abrahams son,
Ishmael. Years later, the covenant of circumcision is established between God and
Abraham (Gen 17). After this, God promises to give Abraham a son by his wife Sarah
(Gen 18:10). Finally, in chapter 21, Sarah gives birth to Isaac.
This leads to more conflict between Sarah and Hagar. It is the struggle between
the firstborn child of a slave (Ishmael) and the subsequently born child of the wife
(Isaac). Sarah demands that Hagar be cast out, in order to protect Isaacs position as
Abrahams heir (Gen 21:10). Abraham is distressed over having to cast Hagar out, but
God reassures him that his descendents will come from Isaac, and that Ishmael will also
give rise to a nation (Gen 21:12-13).
177
Paul is not unique in reinterpreting the significance of this story. Judaism has a
rich tradition of interpretation. 315 Noteworthy here is how Paul uses the story for his own
ends, reinterpreting it in order to reshape the groups boundaries. Critically, changes to
the story of Abraham mark changes in the Abraham prototype.
Here, Paul continues the line of reasoning he has been developing. He starts by
tying Ishmael to the concept of flesh, and Isaac to the concept of promise. These two
concepts are well developed in Galatians. The flesh is repeatedly connected to the law
and contrasted with the spirit (Gal 3:2-3, 5:16-18). In contrast the promise is connected to
faith, the spirit, and the blessing of Abraham (Gen 3:14). Here Paul extends this to
Abrahams children. By connecting Sarah and Isaac to notion of the promise, Paul is
continuing his reinterpretation of Abrahams descendents that he started when discussing
the seed of Abraham (Gal 3:29). The effect of the argument is the same. Paul is shifting
the group boundaries away from genetic descent towards spiritual designation.
Galatians 4:24-26
24 ,
, . 25
,
. 26 ,

24
These things are an allegory, for these are two covenants, one, from
mount Sinai, bearing children into slavery, which is Hagar. 25 Hagar is
mount Sinai in Arabia, and it now corresponds to Jerusalem, for she is in
slavery with her children. 26 The Jerusalem above is free, which is our
mother.
Here Paul declares that these things are allegorical. To a first-century audience,
the shock of the passage comes not from the fact that Paul interpreted the passage
315
178
allegorically. Others did that also. 316 It comes from the fact that Pauls interpretation
turns the accepted interpretation and group boundaries on their head. 317 The Jewish
people believed that they were the children of Abraham. They were not just his children,
but the descendants of Isaac. In Genesis 21:12 God declares Isaac to be the source of
Abrahams descendents, and this view prevailed.
Paul manages to both stays in line with this tradition and radically alters it. He
connects the promise to Sarah and Isaac, which keeps in line with the accepted idea that
Abrahams true heirs come from Isaac. But he connects Jerusalem, and the law to Hagar!
This flips the traditional understanding on its head. Traditionally, the law and its practice
in Jerusalem mark the Jewish people. They mark Abrahams descendents, and distinguish
them from others. In the words of the previous chapter, they form a behavioral prototype
that defines the groups boundaries. But Paul has reversed the association. According to
Paul, Abrahams true heirs come from the promise. Because Paul views the law as
antithetical to this promise, the law and Jerusalem must be associated with Hagar.
This is Pauls line of reasoning, but the strength of Pauls argument comes not
from its logical construction, but from its manipulation of the Abraham prototype. By
presenting a new understanding of Sarah and Hagar, Paul is really presenting a new
understanding of Abraham. The character of Abraham is defined by his story. Change the
316

Punt, "Subverting Sarah," 453-68; Punt, "Revealing Rereading. Part 2," 101-18; Punt, "Revealing
Rereading Part 1," 87-100. For additional information see: C. H. Cosgrove, "The Law Has Given Sarah No
Children (Gal. 4:21-30)," Novum Testamentum 29, no. 3 (1987): 219-35; T. D. Gordon, "The Problem at
Galatia," Interpretation 41, no. 1 (1987): 41-43; Richard N. Longenecker, "Graphic Illustrations of a
Believer's New Life in Christ: Galatians 4:21-31," Review and Expositor 91, no. 2 (1994): 183-99; C. M.
Maier, "Psalm 87 as a Reappraisal of the Zion Tradition and Its Reception in Galatians 4:26," Catholic
Biblical Quarterly 69, no. 3 (2007): 473-86; T. H. Tobin, "What Shall We Say That Abraham Found? The
Controversy Behind Romans 4," Harvard Theological Review 88, no. 4 (1995): 440-41.
317
179
story and you change the character. It is this character, this prototypical figure of
Abraham, upon which people will base their behavior.
As with all prototypes, Pauls new figure of Abraham follows the metacontrast
principle. First, it emphasizes the similarities found between the followers of Jesus. The
unifying commonality, of faith and the promise, is necessarily vague given the diverse
nature of the community. Second, it emphasizes the differences between the new group
standard of the promise and the previous one, the law. Finally, the prototype reflects
positively on the new group and is based on an ideal, hypothetical group member
(Abraham), two things commonly seen in prototypes.
Galatians 4:28-31
28 , , . 29
, .
30 ;
.
31 , , .
28
And you, O Brothers, are children of the promise, like Isaac. 29 But as
then, when the one who was born of flesh persecuted the one [who was
born] of the spirit, so also now. 30 But what do the scriptures say? Cast
out the maidservant and her son, for the son of the maidservant will not
inherit with the son of the freewoman. 31 Therefore, O Brothers, we are
not children of a maidservant but of a freewoman.
In this final passage, Paul starts by identifying the members of the congregation as
the children of the promise, like Isaac. 318 This summarizes Pauls reinterpretation of who
Abrahams descendents are. Interestingly this is followed by another analogy. Though
not found in the Genesis account, there is a developed tradition that tells of Ishmaels
318
Pauls use of brothers may have reflected a desire to unify the community in Galatia. Troy W. Martin,
"The Brother Body: Addressing and Describing the Galatians and the Agitators as Adelphoi," Biblical
Research 47 (2002): 5-18.
180
hostility towards Isaac. 319 Paul builds upon this here, declaring that the hostility
experienced by the community in Galatia mirrors that experienced by Isaac.
The call to cast out the maidservant further defines the groups, and serves as a
warning to those interested in circumcision. 320 This type of reasoning can have a
profound effect upon a group. Criticism can undermine a groups cohesion, but when that
criticism is incorporated into the groups prototype, it can actually serve to reinforce the
groups boundaries. This is easily seen in the NT. Jesus reportedly declared that his
followers would be hated as he was, and that if they stayed strong they would be
rewarded (e.g. Mark 13:13, Matt 10:22, John 15:18). This creates a situation in which
being criticized by an out-group makes the in-group member more prototypical. In turn,
this serves to strengthen the groups entitativity. This can easily be seen in modern
Christian fundamentalism and other marginalized religious groups. Here, Paul is
incorporating this idea into Abrahams narrative, further cementing his reinterpretation of
this traditional prototype. Paul ends the section with one final declaration, identifying the
congregation with the children of Sarah, and the agitators with the children of Hagar.
319

Susan Grove Eastman, "'Cast out the Slave Woman and Her Son': The Dynamics of Exclusion and
Inclusion in Galatians 4.30," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 38, no. 3 (2006): 309-36.
320
181
Chapter 9: Superordinate Identities
A powerful method for bringing people together is the creation of superordinate
identities. Superordinate identities are overarching identities that encompass people who
belong to other social identities as well. For example, the American national identity
encompasses many people. American Jews, Christians, Muslims, etc, are all members of
the larger American social identity. The American identity can therefore bring these
people together under one unified social identity.
There are some important points to remember. First, which identity is salient (i.e.
prominent and relevant) will change depending on the social context. Thus, while people
are celebrating the 4th of July, their American identity may dominate. They would see
everyone as part of their American group instead of categorizing them according to their
religion. The social context makes the American social identity the most relevant, and
thus salient. Conversely, at a worship service the same individual will likely categorize
others according to their religion. This context emphasizes religion, and thus makes
religious identities salient.
Second, superordinate identities are most successful when the subordinate identity
is secure. This principle is known as the mutual intergroup differentiation model. It
simply states that superordinate identities can improve relations as long as the integrity of
the subgroups is maintained. Attempts to categorize individuals on a purely superordinate
level can constitute a threat to their subordinate identities. This can lead to increased
levels of discrimination as individuals try to maintain their identity. 321 These factors
come into play in Galatians as Paul attempts to establish a superordinate identity (Gal
321
Hornsey and Hogg, "Intergroup Similarity," 948-58.
182
3:28). Paul is challenged with creating a superordinate identity that both he and his
opponents can reconcile with their Jewish identities.
Unfortunately, the situation in Galatia and Pauls attempts to create a
superordinate identity are not as clear as they might seem. The immediate problem goes
back to the difference between my approach and that of Philip Esler. I approach Galatians
as an intragroup conflict, while Esler approaches it as an intergroup conflict. For
example, Esler takes Galatians 3:28 as evidence that Paul is defending his newly created
social identity (Israelite and Gentile followers of Christ) against an out-group, the
Israelites.
The fact that Paul had converted both Israelites and Gentiles in Galatia to
faith in Christ and integrated them into the communities where there was,
ideally at least, neither Ioudaios nor Hellene, neither slave nor free, neither
male nor female, but they were all one in Christ Jesus (3.28), meant that
there was now to be a new social and religious entity on the scene. Paul
unambiguously asserts that the Christ-followers constituted a third group,
set over against both the Judaic and Gentiles worlds:
6:15 For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but
a new creation.
6:16 Peace and mercy be upon all who walk by this rule, upon the Israel of
God. 322
Elser acknowledges that there is a question as to whether or not such an independent
identity was established by the time Paul wrote his letter.
In short, Eslers view is that this group did not exist until Paul created it during
his missionary trips. 323 Esler does note that the existence of Israelite converts created a
residual affiliation with Judaism. This leads to a weakening of the distinction between the
two groups. Thus, according to Esler, Pauls primary purpose in Galatians is to strengthen
322
323

183
the group boundaries between the followers of Jesus (both Jewish and Hellenistic) and
the Israelites. 324
This position has its strengths. The early Jesus movement created an identity on
some level given that some people followed Jesus while others did not. Indeed, if Gal
3:27-28 existed independently as a baptismal statement prior to Pauls use of it in
Galatians, then this is evidence that an early form of Christian identity already existed
before Paul wrote Galatians. This proto-Christian identity would have certainly run into
challenges when facing an established Jewish identity. When these two social groups
encountered each other, there would have been inter-group interactions, leading to ingroup bias, new prototypes, adherence to the metacontrast principle, and other
phenomena predicted by SIT. Eslers work highlights these trends, and helps explain the
early rise of Christian identity. His work helps explain how Galatians contributed to this
rise, and how the ideas found in Galatians helped form the core of the Christian identity.
On the other hand, there are significant weaknesses with this interpretation. First,
it does not do justice to the situation in Galatia. Galatians is an intra-group conflict, not
an inter-group conflict. While the ideas in Galatians played a key role in later inter-group
conflicts between Christians and Jews, those involved in the situation at Galatia all
believed they were part of the same group, thus creating an intra-group conflict. Whether
the group is viewed as Christian, or as a Jewish group that followed Jesus, the result is
the same; the agitators and the Galatians believed they were part of the same group.
Traditional scholarship has trouble seeing past the theological disagreements. But
SIT shows that, on a social psychological level, the agitators are attempting to reinforce
the groups prototypical behavior. It is striking how Jewish this behavior is. The agitators
324
184
wanted the followers of Jesus in Galatia to be circumcised and follow the law. This is
because their Jewish identity was salient, as a result of the threat posed by mixed table
fellowship. Additionally, their cultural ties with Jerusalem and the uncertainty there
probably reinforced this defensive posture. In other words, the agitators viewed
themselves as Jewish, and felt that all followers of Jesus should be Jewish (through
circumcision and the law).
This makes it tempting to view the situation (as Esler does) as a conflict between
Judaism and Christianity. But both sides of the dispute felt that they belonged to the same
group. Although a proto-Christian identity existed, as seen in 3:27-28, it was not salient
in Galatia. This is evident not just in the presence of the agitators, but in the Jewish
practice of the Galatians (4:10). The situation speaks to a lack of distinction, a time when
the exact nature of what it meant to follow Jesus was in question, as the boundaries
between the proto-Christian identity and Judaism were unclear. Therefore, while Eslers
approach better addressed the consequences of the letter of Galatians for the early
Christian community, this approach better addressed the immediate situation in Galatia as
an intra-group conflict in which the distinction between Christianity and Judaism was
unclear.
Second, Eslers view does not adequately explain Pauls manipulation of key
Jewish prototypes. Paul reinterprets the law and Abraham in such a way as to make the
(Israel of God) a more inclusive group. Paul is not defending a new
group; he is reinterpreting the old one. This speaks to an identity that is in flux, an intragroup struggle, not an inter-group conflict between competing communities.
185
As was seen with Abraham, many concepts that Paul uses to establish his new
group boundaries, such as faith and the promise, are Jewish. There is a rich tradition
within Judaism that speaks of Abrahams faithfulness and the promises that were given to
him. Thus many of the things that initially seem to establish a separate identity for the
early followers of Jesus were in fact rooted in the Jewish social identity. This reflects the
immediate situation in Galatians.
All of that said, this is not to say that Eslers approach is wrong, only that it
explains some things better than others. It can be useful to view the situation in Galatia as
an inter-group conflict. It lets one see the origins of Christian identity, and how this
identity was used to unite different ethnic groups. In contrast, this intra-group analysis
will focus on how Pauls statements of superordinate identity emerge from his
understanding and reinterpretation of traditional Jewish prototypes.
Various phrases are used in Galatians to identify the true group members. The
terms are (The Church of God, 1:13), (ones of
faith, 3:7, 9), (sons of Abraham, 3:7), (those who believe,
3:22), (sons of God, 3:26), (you are one in Christ
Jesus, 3:28), (you are of Christ, 3:29), (seed of
Abraham, 3:29), (heirs, 3:29, 4:7), (sonship, 4:5), (son, 4:67), (children of the promise, 4:28), (of a freewoman,
4:31), (ones of Christ, 5:24), (the household
186
of faith, 6:10), (new creation, 6:15), (Israel of God,
6:16). 325
The terms used are telling. First, it is worth noting that there is no single
designation for the early followers of Jesus. In other words, there is no name for the
group (e.g. Christians). This is not to say that the group did not exist. The group existed
to whatever extent the early followers of Jesus engaged in mutual self-construal. But it
does suggest that the group was in its infancy, particularly when viewed through the
situation at Galatia and the argument over circumcision. Second, surprisingly few of the
designations use explicit references to Christ to define the group. Only 3 of the 20 cases,
(you are one in Christ Jesus, 3:28), (you are of
Christ, 3:29), and (ones of Christ, 5:24), make use of Christ.
To be fair, some of the other phrases are intricately connected to the figure of
Christ. For example, in 3:22 (the promise of faith
in Jesus Christ) is given to those who believe. In 3:26, the Galatians are sons of God
(through faith in Christ Jesus). In 3:29, the seeds of
Abraham, the heirs, are (of Christ). Finally, the sonship expressed in 4:5-7 is
predicated upon the redemption provided by Jesus (4:4). These examples demonstrate the
difficulty in trying to do a simple numerical analysis. If one includes these references,
then half of the 20 group designations in Galatians are based upon Christ. On the other
hand, given Pauls reinterpretation of faith, the promise, and the Abraham story, all of
these phrases connect to Christ in someway.
325
See: William S. Campbell, "Christianity and Judaism: Continuity and Discontinuity," International
Bulletin of Missionary Research 8, no. 2 (1984): 56-57; J. A. D. Weima, "Gal. 6:11-18: A Hermeneutical
Key to the Galatian Letter," Calvin Theological Journal 28, no. 1 (1993): 90-107; S. Lewis Johnson, "Paul
And "The Israel of God": An Exegetical and Eschatological Case-Study," Master's Seminary Journal 20,
no. 1 (2009): 41-55.
187
Because of this, it is tempting to interpret Galatians only in light of an established
Christian identity. But this approach would miss the valuable insights provided by an
intra-group perspective. Jewish prototypes are more consistent throughout the text, and
provide a much firmer base for understanding the social identity in play at Galatia. The
phrases consistently make use of the concepts of inheritance, sonship, the promise, and
faithfulness. These ideas come explicitly from the Abraham prototype. Paul even
concludes 3:27-28, the quintessential statement of Christian identity, by writing
, (you are from the seed of Abraham,
heirs, according to the promise).
The identity found in Galatians is firmly rooted in Jewish identity, and this speaks
to the saliency of Jewish prototypes and identity in Galatia. It is important to note that
this does not speak against the existence of an extant Christian identity. SIT states that
only one social identity can be salient in any given situation. In other words, when
presented with a social situation, individuals can only readily use one social identity to
make evaluations. Therefore, the dominance of Jewish prototypes in Galatians speaks
only to the salience of Jewish social identity; it does not indicate that other identities (i.e.
a proto-Christian Identity) do not exist. Ultimately, it is this salient identity that becomes
the base upon which Paul constructs his new superordinate identity.
SIT is critical in understanding how Paul goes about establishing a superordinate
identity, and Pauls efforts here (particularly 3:26-29) bring together many of the
elements discussed previously. First, SIT defines what a social identity is. A social
identity is a mutual self-construal. This is straightforward enough, and not that far from
188
the common recognition that Jews, identifying themselves as part of a larger group and
community, created a social identity in the ancient world.
Second, and more critically, SIT explains how social identities are defined. Group
boundaries that define social identities are set by group prototypes that establish
prescriptions for normal behavior and a basis for evaluating the behavior of group
members. This allows the historian to look for the prototypical behaviors and figures in a
given group. For example, evidence from the Jewish revolts shows that circumcision and
proper worship were two critical prototypes for Jewish identity.
Third, it helps the historian trace the groups identity through time, and see how
the group prototypes react to different historical and social contexts. It is not coincidental
that circumcision and mixed table-fellowship (i.e. proper worship) are at the heart of the
situation in Galatia. These are the same prototypical behaviors that had been at the heart
of Jewish identity for hundreds of years.
Fourth, SIT explains why people react so dramatically when their social identity
is undermined. Social identity is largely a byproduct of categorization. People
depersonalize themselves and others, evaluating individuals according to their group, and
not according to their individual idiosyncrasies. Therefore, since the individual has
internalized the groups identity, things which undermine the group are viewed as
personally threatening. This is seen in the numerous Jewish revolts that were sparked
when rulers outlawed circumcision or attempted to establish a new god in the temple of
Jerusalem.
Up to this fourth point, SIT primarily formalizes the historians intuition. It
provides a formal structure for informal observations. The idea that circumcision is
189
important to Judaism and that many Jews were willing to die to defend their way of life is
not new. But SIT provides a model for understanding these behaviors. This is critical. By
applying SIT (or other social scientific models), which continues to be experimentally
tested, validated, and refined, historians can be more confident and accurate in the claims
that they make. Additionally, by using clear models historians can improve scholarly
discourse by making their assumptions and reasoning more transparent. Finally, using an
established social scientific model allows scholars to compare vary different situations
within a common framework. For example, SIT allows one to compare the birth of
Christianity to the start of other religions (Islam, Mormonism, etc.). Thus one can look
for commonalities that are otherwise obscured by historical circumstance.
Returning to Galatians for the fifth and sixth points, SIT explains why Paul chose
his topics and why his rhetoric was influential. These two questions drive the volumes of
rhetorical analysis of Galatians. Why did Paul write what he did? Why was Pauls writing
persuasive? SIT allows us to answer these questions, at least on the social psychological
level.
Fifth, Paul wrote about the law and Abraham because they are two central Jewish
prototypes. They define the Jewish social identity. Paul, implicitly or explicitly, knew
that by manipulating these key concepts he could shift the groups boundaries. This
would allow the Gentile followers of Jesus to join the group, to be embraced as in-group
members.
Sixth, Pauls reasoning was persuasive (at least for some) for precisely the same
reason. He was using valued prototypes. He took established prototypes such as Christ
and Abraham, with the faithfulness and promise Abraham embodied, and used them to
190
shift peoples perception of the group. This understanding of Pauls work also sheds light
on Pauls creation of a superordinate identity.
SIT highlights two issues concerning Pauls newly established identity. First, the
SIT teases out the Jewish nature of Pauls arguement. Second, in accordance with the
mutual intergroup differentiation model, SIT explains how this preservation of Jewish
identity makes adoption of the superordinate identity more likely.
Taking the points in turn, the Jewish nature of the new identity can be seen in
both the terms of identity and the reasoning behind them. Some of the terms clearly come
from Judaism, such as (sons of Abraham, 3:7), (seed of
Abraham, 3:29), and (Israel of God, 6:16). This list can be further
expanded when it is set to include the terms which make reference back to descending
from Abraham, such as (heirs, 3:29), (children of the
promise, 4:28), (of a freewoman, 4:31). Finally, (ones of
faith, 3:7, 9) are equated with the sons of Abraham and receive his blessing. This is a
challenge for interpreting the situation in Galatia as an inter-group conflict. The new
identity provided by Paul is very Jewish. It reflects the ties the Galatians must have had
to the Jewish community. In this way, it does not sound like two extant, independent
communities debating with one another. The situation is more inline with an intra-group
conflict, where the two sides are debating the nature of group membership.
Critically, this does not undermine the claim that Paul is establishing a
superordinate identity. The manipulation of existing group boundaries and the
establishment of a superordinate identity share, in this case, a common goal: the
expansion of the group to include members that had previously been excluded. In this
191
way, Pauls attempts to establish a superordinate identity are a natural extension of his
previous efforts. This is reflected in the fact that many of the terms he uses for the group
are solidly rooted in Jewish tradition.
Secondly, SIT suggests that the perpetuation of this Jewish tradition was useful
for establishing an effective superordinate identity. The mutual intergroup differentiation
model states that people will resist a superordinate identity if they feel that their
subordinate identity is threatened. As seen in the Jewish revolts, people react defensively
when they feel that their social identity is threatened. This also happens on smaller scales,
and is a risk that Paul takes as he reinterprets and redefines Jewish identity in Galatians.
If Paul was too dismissive of Jewish tradition when he argued for bringing Jews
and Gentiles together under Christ, then Jewish followers of Jesus, let alone Jews who
did not follow Jesus, would have dismissed Pauls argument because it threatened their
Jewish identity. In all likelihood, many of the Jewish followers of Jesus did reject Pauls
reasoning. But, for those who did not, Pauls efforts to give Jewish identity and tradition
a central place within the new identity was vital. It allowed the individuals to feel secure
in their Jewish identity, and thus allowed them to embrace the Gentile followers of Jesus
as fellow in-group members.
Paul probably had an informal understanding of this concept. As a Jew himself,
he would have had to reconcile his old beliefs, which lead him to persecute followers of
Jesus, with his new found devotion to Christ. Galatians shows some of the ways in which
Paul resolved this dilemma. Informally, what worked for Paul will work for others. In a
formal sense, Pauls writing adheres to the mutual intergroup differentiation model,
192
maintaining valued and distinctive subordinate identities in order to establish a new
superordinate identity.
This is why Pauls argument is persuasive, and it is also why he chooses to write
about Abraham, the law, faithfulness, and the promise. He is retaining the importance of
the Jewish identity. This is why the law, while largely dismissed, maintains an important
function in the development of Gods covenant, so that
(the law is our guardian until Christ, 3:24). This is why Paul ends
the quintessential statement of Christian identity in 3:26-29 with,
, (you are from the seed of Abraham, heirs, according
to the promise).
Galatians 3:26-29
26 27
, . 28
, ,
. 29 ,
, .
26 For all of you are sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For
all of you who were baptized into Christ, you clothed yourself with Christ.
28 There is no Jew, nor Greek, there is no slave nor free, there is no
male and female, for you all are one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you are of
Christ, then you are from the seed of Abraham, heirs, according to the
promise.
This is one of the most famous passages in the NT, although it is sometimes
misinterpreted. At its core is a statement of identity, not a statement of equality. 326 But
326
D. K. Buell, "The Politics of Interpretation: The Rhetoric of Race and Ethnicity in Paul," Journal of
Biblical Literature 123, no. 2 (2004): 235-51; T. Hopko, "Galatians 3:28: An Orthodox Interpretation," St.
Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 35, no. 2-3 (1991): 169-86; John J. Davis, "Some Reflections on
Galatians 3:28, Sexual Roles, and Biblical Hermeneutics," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
19, no. 3 (1976): 202; Madeleine Boucher, "Some Unexplored Parallels to 1 Cor 11:11-12 and Gal 3:28:
193
the interpretation of the passage is greatly complicated by the fact that it is a confessional
statement from the early church that has been elaborated on by Paul. Many scholars agree
that vs. 27-28 came from an early confession given at baptism. 327
The reasoning behind this conclusion is relatively straightforward. First, the
passage itself explicitly mentions baptism. This is Pauls only explicit reference to
baptism in Galatians. 328 Baptism is not at issue in Galatians. Additionally, elsewhere
when Paul uses this language, baptism is again mentioned. It should be observed that the
pairings of Gal 3:28 and 1 Cor 12:13 appear explicitly in conjunction with the mention of
baptism yet baptism as such is not discussed in any of these contexts. This suggests
that these pairings were originally formulated in a baptismal liturgy of the early
church. 329
This is not the only thing that seems out of place. Paul brackets this early
confessional statement with two verses that tie the statement back into Pauls on going
argument. Verse 26 provides a bridge between Pauls previous discussion of the law and
the confessional statement. Verse 29 finishes the bracket by bringing the conversation
The NT on the Role of Women," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 31, no. 1 (1969): 50-58; B. R. Gaventa, "Is
Galatians Just a 'Guy Thing'? A Theological Reflection," Interpretation 53, no. 3 (2000): 267-78; D. C.
Lopez, "Paul, Gentiles, and Gender Paradigms," Union Seminary Quarterly Review 59, no. 3-4 (2005): 92106; R. M. Grant, "Neither Male nor Female," Biblical Research 37 (1992): 5-14; B. Kahl, "No Longer
Male: Masculinity Struggles Behind Galatians 3.28?," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 79
(2000): 37-49. For articles on the passages modern ethical implications see: Christine Lienemann-Perrin,
"The Biblical Foundations for a Feminist and Participatory Theology of Mission," International Review of
Mission 93, no. 368 (2004): 17-34; Stephen Douglas Lowe, "Rethinking the Female Status/Function
Question: The Jew/Gentile Relationship as Paradigm," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 34,
no. 1 (1991): 59-75; Claire Jowitt, "'Inward' and 'Outward' Jews: Margaret Fell, Circumcision, and
Women's Preaching," Reformation 4 (1999): 139-67; John E. Alsup, "Imagining the New: Feminism,
Galatians 3:28 and the Current Interpretive Discussion," Austin Seminary Bulletin 105, no. 2 (1990): 91108; H. W. House, "A Biblical View of Women in the Ministry: Part 1 (of 5 Parts): 'Neither ... Male nor
Female ... In Christ Jesus,'" Bibliotheca Sacra 145 (1988): 47-56; G. L. Borchert, "A Key to Pauline
Thinking--Galatians 3:23-29: Faith and the New Humanity," Review and Expositor 91, no. 2 (1994): 14551.
327
Longenecker, Galatians, 154-55; Betz, Galatians, 186; Stanton, "Galatians," 1160.
328
329
194
back to the question of Abrahams true descendents and heirs. This allows Paul to return
to his analogy of the law as a guardian. Thus, vs. 27-28 stand out from the surrounding
context.
This also comes to light when looking at the three coordinates of v. 28. Only the
first one, (there is no Jew, nor Greek), is immediately
relevant to Pauls discussion as it bears directly on the question of Gentile acceptance
raised in 3:14 and continued through 3:25.
The second coordinate, (there is no slave nor
free), is not relevant to Pauls theological argument. Slavery and freedom are discussed in
chapters 4 and 5, but it is spiritual slavery and spiritual freedom that are under
consideration. In contrast, 3:28 is concerned with the social distinction between slaves
and free persons. Paul clearly does not intend it to mean that there is no difference
between spiritual slavery and spiritual freedom.
Finally, the third coordinate, (there is no male and
female), does not relate to rest of the letter. Paul does not address the relationship
between men and women in Galatians. 330 Taken together, all of these arguments strongly
suggest that these verses were predated the letter of Galatians and were incorporated into
the letter by Paul.
The independence of the statement and its subsequent use in the early church have
complicated its interpretation. The function of the passage in Galatians is often conflated
with its use in the early church and its use in modern Christian discussions of equality.
330
Longenecker, Galatians, 154. For alternative views see: Troy W. Martin, "The Covenant of
Circumcision (Genesis 17:9-14) and the Situational Antithesis in Galatians 3:28," Journal of Biblical
Literature 122, no. 1 (2003): 111-25; J Albert Harrill, "Coming of Age and Putting on Christ: The Toga
Virilis Ceremony, Its Paraenesis, and Paul's Interpretation of Baptism in Galatians," Novum Testamentum
44, no. 3 (2002): 252-77.
195
Scholars recognize that unity is the primary focus of the text, and that the notions of
equality come from the text secondarily. 331 For example, this is how Longenecker takes
the text.
Taking Gal 3:27-28 to be a pre-Pauline Christian confession, either in
whole or in part, we may say, then, that when early Christians spoke of
being baptized into Christ they also spoke of the old divisions between
Jew and Gentile, slave and free, and male and female having come to an
end. Certainly the proclamation of the elimination of divisions in these
three areas should be seen first of all in terms of spiritual relations: that
before God whatever their differing situations, all people are accepted on
the same basis of faith and together make up the one body of Christ. But
these three couplets also cover in embryonic fashion all the essential
relationships of humanity, and so need to be seen as having racial,
cultural, and sexual implications as well. And that is, as I have argued
elsewhere, how the earliest Christians saw them admittedly, not always
as clearly as we might like, but still pointing the way toward a more
Christian personal and social ethic. 332
Thus, this statement in Galatians provides us with an early confessional statement of
identity.
Interestingly, the original function of this passage in the early (pre-Pauline/nonPauline) church is not so clear. As mentioned above, the most common opinion among
scholars is that the saying served a unifying role, as a statement of identity within
baptism. Dennis MacDonald, however, has proposed an alternative interpretation of this
pre-Pauline statement. In his view, the statement is not one of unity, but of putting off the
body. The exegetical merger of Platonic anthropological dualism with Genesis 1-3
provides the best conceptual background for the Dominical Saying, inasmuch as the
images of the saying refer to the souls liberation from matter and sexuality as it returns
331
Fung, Galatians, 176; Wayne Walden, "Galatians 3:28: Grammar Observations," Restoration Quarterly
51, no. 1 (2009): 45-50; Doug Heidebrecht, "Distinction and Function in the Church: Reading Galatians
3:28 in Context," Direction 34, no. 2 (2005): 181-93.
332
196
to the image of the heavenly Adam. 333 He supports this with a detailed analysis of Greek
philosophy, Philo, the Gospel of the Egyptians, Julius Cassianus, Clement of Alexandria,
2 Clement, and the Gospel of Thomas. 334
This view of the passage provides a dramatically different interpretation and
function for it in the early church.
The Dominical Saying is an early Christian baptismal saying dramatizing
the initiates putting off the body, putting on light, and returning to sexual
oneness. In some communities, the prebaptismal garment was trampled as
a symbol of disdain for the body and its governing powers. One result of
this putative return was celibacy. 335
One of the appealing aspects of this interpretation is that it places the saying and ritual of
baptism within the context of religious ritual and spiritual practice. It would be
inappropriate to view one of the most sacred Christian traditions merely as serving a
sociological function, and this interpretation connects the ritual to the spirituality of early
Christians.
Furthermore, if MacDonalds interpretation is correct then Pauls manipulation of
the groups identity in Galatia becomes all the more pronounced.
Paul knew of the saying by the year 53 when he wrote Galatians. He
altered it so that putting off the garment of shame became putting on
Christ, and the two sexes becoming one became all social groups
becoming one in Christ. These alterations suggest that for Paul baptism
was not the means by which the individual escaped the body and was
restored to the primordial state; rather baptism was the symbol by which
the individual expressed membership in a new creation, a unified
community. 336
333
Dennis Ronald MacDonald, There Is No Male and Female: The Fate of a Dominical Saying in Paul and
Gnosticism (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), 30.
334
MacDonald, No Male and Female, 23-48.
335
MacDonald, No Male and Female, 62.
336
MacDonald, No Male and Female, 128.
197
The passages place in Galatians thus becomes a power example of Pauls rhetoric. He is
consciously shaping the text in order to be persuasive and unify the community. Even if
one disagrees with MacDonalds conclusions, his work remains important because it
reminds scholars that the early Christian community was not uniform. Different followers
of Jesus, at different points in time, used this saying and ritual in different ways. It is
naive to think that Pauls use in Galatians set the standard which all Christians thereafter
followed. Thus, MacDonalds work highlights Pauls role in the text, as he attempted to
eliminate the divisions that were facing the community.
SIT provides a new way for understanding this elimination of divisions before
God. The elimination of divisions is basically the formation of a group. The unstated
counterpart to eliminating such divisions is the creation of new ones. Instead of dividing
along old ethnic, financial, and gender lines, the new distinction is drawn between those
that follow Jesus and those that do not. This is the texts function in Galatians. It is a
statement of identity. It contains within it a new prototypical standard and Paul is using it
to address the divisions he is encountering in Galatia.
Thus, its impact upon personal and social ethics is the result of later interpretation
and extrapolation. This understanding of the text as an identity statement helps explain
some aspects of the text. As Betz asks,
It is significant that Paul makes these statements not as utopian ideals or as
ethical demands, but as accomplished facts. The question is, therefore,
how the present tense of the phrase you are is to be understood. Why
does Paul make such claims? How are they related to baptism? What is the
reality of these claims? 337
337
198
The present tense makes sense given that the passage is a statement of identity, and not a
statement of theological or social equality. As revolutionary as social implications of the
text may have been, they were not being addressed in Galatians.
While it may be useful to describe the passage as a statement of identity, rather
than one of theological unity or oneness, SIT goes further in helping one understand
Pauls use of this early confessional. This takes the conversation back to the two guiding
questions of this work. Why did Paul write what he did, and why was it persuasive?
In Galatians, Paul is weighing in upon an ongoing debate over the nature of the
group. Because this is a debate over the nature of the group and the groups boundaries,
prototypes become the focus of attention. This is why Paul tackles the nature of the law,
faith, the promise, and story of Abraham. He manipulated these concepts, expanding the
boundries of the group so as to include a wider array of people. This is seen in the terms
of identity that he uses to designate the group. As seen earlier, many of the terms are
deeply embedded within the Jewish tradition. Particularly striking are those that make
direct reference to Abraham, and the (Israel of God, 6:16), which closes
the letter. Galatians 3:27-28 is placed directly into this context. It is intimately connected
to the on-going discussion by Pauls bold statement in v. 29, which equates the unity
found in Christ to being of Abrahams seed.
Why does Paul chose this confessional statement? He chooses it because it is a
statement of identity, and as such carries within it the new prototypical standard for the
group. More than that, this prototypical standard, which is expressed in being baptized
into Christ, is at the heart of the situation in Galatians. This is exactly the type of
behavior that undermines the social identity of the agitators in Galatia.
199
The agitators, as stated before, feel a strong cultural connection to Judaism, and
probably to Jerusalem as well. Their Jewish identity is salient. Thus they are seeking to
reinforce those prototypical behaviors that define the Jewish identity. But this newly
emerging prototypical standard of baptism (as expressed in 3:27-28) is undermining the
traditional prototypes of the law and circumcision. Here Paul brings the competing
prototypes together. He has been working to reinterpret both Abraham and the law, and
here he marries his own interpretation of the old prototypes to the new one.
The newly formed piece of rhetoric is persuasive for a couple of reasons. First,
and mentioned previously, is that it preserves the subordinate identity while it establishes
the new superordinate identity. Attaching Abraham to the end of the confessional
statement helps maintain the unique and important place of Judaism within the early
Jesus movement.
The confessional statement denies any distinction between Jews and Gentiles.
Taken in and of itself, this is very threatening and unsettling to individuals who value
their Jewish social identity. On the other hand, by incorporating Abraham into the
equation, Paul is able to soften the blow by basically interpreting the confessional
statement in light of Jewish tradition. In other words, he makes the lack of a distinction
between Jews and Gentiles a Jewish idea. This makes it much more likely to be accepted
by Jewish followers of Jesus.
Second, the rhetoric is persuasive because it is combining powerful prototypes
from the early Jesus movement. If the confessional was indeed attached to baptism, it
would have played a central role in the social identity of early followers of Jesus. By
combining this central pillar of identity with pivotal concepts within the Jewish identity
200
(however reinterpreted), Paul was able to create a powerful synthesis, which many people
would have found persuasive.
201
Chapter 10: Prototypical Leaders
Finally, the social identity theory of leadership provides insights on how Paul
established himself as a leader in the community. The social identity theory of leadership
states that when the groups identity is salient, prototypical leaders will be more effective
than less prototypical leaders. This phenomenon comes out of the process of
depersonalized social attraction. Through depersonalization, people categorize
themselves and others according to their social identities. In so doing, individuals are no
longer evaluated according to their individual idiosyncrasies. They are instead evaluated
upon the basis of group prototypes, judged as group members. Thus, those members that
are more prototypical are more socially attractive than those who are less prototypical.
This is referred to as depersonalized social attraction.
Depersonalized social attraction can be contrasted with relationships between
people based upon a personal knowledge and interaction between individuals. While
depersonalized social attraction is intimately tied to the group and group behavior,
personal relationships are built upon the individuals involved and have less of an impact
upon the group. Correspondingly, depersonalized social attraction has a stronger impact
when the salience of the group is high, when the group is perceived as cohesive, and
when the prototype is clear.
The social identity theory of leadership has shown that leaders are subject to the
same social forces. The social attractiveness of leaders is important. When the groups
identity is salient, the prototypicality of the leader is important. Thus, leaders who better
reflect the groups prototype are more effective than those who do not, at least when the
202
groups identity is salient. When the saliency of the groups identity is low, the leaders
prototypicality is less important.
This phenomenon, described by the social identity theory leadership, gives insight
into Pauls portrayal of himself and of other leaders in the early Jesus movement. Pauls
portrayals of himself as an excellent Jew and as a humble follower of Christ make Paul
prototypical. This makes him more social attractive to those people in Galatia who do not
know him personally, making him a more effective leader. Furthermore, Pauls
manipulation and adaptation of the groups prototypes coincide with Pauls own
character, reflecting his personal theology and religious practice. Thus, the more people
are persuaded by Pauls reasoning, the more prototypical Paul becomes, becoming more
social attractive and more effective in his position of leadership.
Conversely, Pauls adapted prototypes make the leaders in Jerusalem less
prototypical, making them less effective leaders and undermining their authority. The
social identity theory of leadership does not address all of the issues between Paul, Peter,
John, and James, because they knew each other on a personal level and likely had a
complicated relationship. But it does explain why Paul chose to write about his life as a
Jew and his sufferings as a follower of Christ. It explains why this was a persuasive
technique, and it helps one understand the impact that Pauls message would have had on
how others perceived the leaders in Jerusalem.
Leadership and Jewish Prototypes in Galatians

Galatians 1:13-14
13 ,
, 14
203

, .
13
For you heard of my behavior when in Judaism, namely that I

excessively persecuted the church of God and destroyed it, 14 and I
progressed in Judaism beyond many contemporaries in my nation, being
more abundantly zealous for the traditions of my ancestors.
Given the salience of the Jewish social identity in Galatia, it is not surprising that
Paul reminded the congregation of his Jewish background. There is an informal
understanding that Paul is establishing his credibility by reminding the Galatians about
his Jewish background. 338 Paul establishes the fact that he knows a great deal about
Judaism, as one of its most ardent practitioners. He was not simplistically undermining
Jewish tradition. Longenecker notes:
As for his life in Judaism (vv 13-14), he denies that he was in any way
prepared for preaching a law-free gospel to Gentiles. Far from it! Rather,
he was a faithful and zealous observer of the Jewish religion and way of
life, even to the point of persecuting Christians and trying to destroy the
church of God. 339
SIT, particularly the social identity theory of leadership, provides a formal way of
understanding this credibility. Here Paul is establishing his prototypicality. The Jewish
social identity was salient in Galatia. The issues at hand, such as circumcision and the
law, were central precepts of this social identity. It may be that because the prototypes are
in question, an individuals prototypicality is critical. It is Pauls prototypicality that
338
Morris Ashcraft, "Paul Defends His Apostleship: Galatians 1 and 2," Review and Expositor 69, no. 4
(1972): 459-69; Jack T. Sanders, "Paul's Autobiographical Statements in Galatians 1-2," Journal of Biblical
Literature 85, no. 3 (1966): 335-43; Paul E. Koptak, "Rhetorical Identification in Paul's Autobiographical
Narrative: Galatians 1:13-2:14," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 40 (1990): 97-113; N. H.
Taylor, "Paul's Apostolic Legitimacy: Autobiographical Reconstruction in Gal. 1:11-2:14," Journal of
Theology for Southern Africa 83 (1993): 65-77; B. R. Gaventa, "Galatians 1 and 2: Autobiography as
Paradigm," Novum Testamentum 28, no. 4 (1986): 309-26; J. S. Vos, "Paul's Argumentation in Galatians
1--2," Harvard Theological Review 87, no. 1 (1994): 8-13; Dockery, "Paul's Defense," 153-64; J. W.
Doeve, "Paulus der Phariser und Galater 1:13-15," Novum Testamentum 6, no. 2-3 (1963): 170-81.
339
Longenecker, Galatians.
204
establishes him as both a good group member and as someone knowledgeable concerning
the issues confronting the community. By making himself more prototypical, Paul
becomes more effective as a leader.
Leadership and Jewish Prototypes in Philippians

This is not the only place where Paul practices this technique. It is even more
pronounced in Philippians 3. The passage in Philippians 3 is particularly telling.
Although doubts have been raised about the authenticity of the chapters placement
within Philippians, the immediate content of the passage shows that Paul is addressing
the same issues he faces in Galatia. 340
Paul makes his concern known immediately. He is again facing the issue of
circumcision and whether it is necessary for followers of Christ. Paul is responding in
Phil 3 to two related problems, 1) the necessity of circumcision and observance of the
Torah as a condition for the admission of Gentiles; 2) the subsequent problem of
commensality in mixed Jewish/Gentile communities, and the resulting need for Jewish
Christians to gentilize. 341 In Phil 3:2-3 Paul writes:
340
The most compelling reason for seeing this as a later addition is the simple reading of 3:1 and 4:4 in
succession. Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. To write the same things again is not trouble to me,
and it is a safeguard for you. Rejoice in the Lord always, again I will say, rejoice! For a defense of the
letters unity, see: Robert Murray, "Philippians," in The Oxford Bible Commentary, ed. John Barton and
John Muddiman (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 1187; Jeffrey T. Reed, "Philippians 3:1 and the
Epistolary Hesitation Formulas: The Literary Integrity of Philippians, Again," Journal of Biblical
Literature 115, no. 1 (1996): 63-90. For further discussion see: Philip Sellew, "Laodiceans and the
Philippians Fragments Hypothesis," Harvard Theological Review 87, no. 1 (1994): 17-28; Paul A.
Holloway, "The Apocryphal Epistle to the Laodiceans and the Partitioning of Philippians," Harvard
Theological Review 91, no. 3 (1998): 321-25; Philip Sellew, "Laodiceans and Philippians Revisited: A
Response to Paul Holloway," Harvard Theological Review 91, no. 3 (1998): 327-29; David Alan Black,
"The Discourse Structure of Philippians: A Study in Textlinguistics," Novum Testamentum 37, no. 1
(1995): 16-49.
341
Fabian E. Udoh, "Paul's Views on the Law: Questions About Origin (Gal 1:6-2:21; Phil 3:2-11),"
Novum Testamentum 42, no. 3 (2000): 225. See also: Mikael Tellbe, "The Sociological Factors Behind
205
2 , ,
. 3 ,
Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the

mutilation; 3 for we are the circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God
and glory in Christ Jesus and do not trust in the flesh.
The parallels to Galatians are clear. Whatever the extenuating circumstances, and
whenever it was written, Paul is again dealing with circumcision and is again arguing that
it is of no value.
The evil workers of Phil 3:2 probably parallel the agitators of Galatians as Jewish
followers of Jesus who argued in favor of circumcision. 342 Paul also contrasts the Spirit
of God with the flesh, in much the same way he contrasts the spirit and the flesh in
Galatians 5. Even the law comes into play in Phil 3:9. Given all of these similarities, in
both content and social context, it is not surprising that Paul addresses the issue the same
way he addresses it in Galatians. That is by highlighting his Jewish credentials. In Phil
3:4-6 Paul writes:
4 , 5
, , , ,
, 6 ,
.
4
If someone else is disposed to trust in the flesh, I far more: 5 circumcised

the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew
of Hebrews; with regard to the Law, a Pharisee; 6 with regard to zeal, a
persecutor of the church; with regard to the righteousness which is in the
Law, found blameless.
This passage is a powerful account of Pauls Jewish heritage.
Philippians 3.1-11 and the Conflict at Philippi," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 55 (1994): 97121.
342
For alternative perspectives, see: David E. Fredrickson, "Envious Enemies of the Cross of Christ
(Philippians 3:18)," Word & World 28, no. 1 (2008): 22-28; Herbert W. Bateman IV, "Were the Opponents
at Philippi Necessarily Jewish?," Bibliotheca Sacra 155 (1998): 39-61.
206
SIT helps explain why Paul chose to talk about his Jewish background in these
cases and why it was effective. In both situations the Jewish social identity was made
salient by Jewish followers of Jesus who argued for continued adherence to traditional
Jewish practices. The social identity theory of leadership states that increased group
salience increases the role that prototypicality plays in establishing effective leadership.
Therefore, in these situations, where the Jewish identity is salient, Pauls prototypicality
becomes increasingly important. In other words, Pauls Jewish identity becomes more
important as Judaism itself becomes important. This is why he chooses to talk about his
Jewish background. This increases his prototypicality and thus makes him more
influential as a leader in the community.
Paul may have written about his Jewish heritage in Galatians to combat claims by
his opponents that he was not truly Jewish or that he was no longer a faithful Jew. In fact,
such attacks were written in the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Ascension of
James, Kerygmata Petrou, Homilies, and Recognitions all criticize Paul for his preaching
and his departure from traditional Jewish doctrine. 343 It is unclear if the agitators in
Galatia made similar arguments, and mirror readings of the text must always be used
cautiously. But given both Pauls statements on his Jewish heritage and the discussion of
the flesh verses the spirit in chapter 5, it is reasonable to conclude that doubts existed, and
that the argument that Paul had forsaken Judaism had been leveled at some point during
Pauls lifetime. Whether it was specifically argued by the agitators, or Paul was merely
responding preemptively is not clear.
In either case, this argument against Pauls teachings further demonstrates the
power that group standards and prototypes have for how leaders are viewed. The
343
207
argument that Paul has forsaken or corrupted his Jewish heritage makes Paul less
prototypical, if not an out-group member. This would directly undermine his ability to
lead effectively. Thus, SIT explains not only why Paul proclaims his Jewish heritage, but
why his opponents, whether at Galatia or elsewhere, undermine it. It is a battle over
Pauls status within the group. It is a battle over Pauls prototypicality, and it has a direct
impact upon Pauls ability to be a leader in the early Jesus movement.
This is particularly true given that Paul dealt with many people indirectly.
Research in the social identity theory of leadership shows that leadership based upon
personal relationships, which are built upon the leader and his relationship with the
individual, is less affected by prototypicality. But Paul wrote letters to many
congregations and frequently addressed situations in which he was not present and not
personally acquainted with those involved. These situations are impersonal. Paul is
attempting to persuade people with whom he does not have a personal relationship. These
are precisely the circumstances under which issues of prototypicality are going to have a
direct impact upon ones effectiveness as a leader.
Leadership and the Christ Prototype in Galatians

Of course, the Jewish prototypes are not the only ones at work in Galatia. As seen
previously, the Christ prototype plays a central role in Pauls arguments in Galatians.
Christ, naturally, was one of the central prototypical figures for those who followed
Jesus. Galatians reflects this. Christs importance as a prototypical figure can be seen in
both Pauls use of Christ as a designation for the group, seen in the previous chapter, and
208
in Pauls ethical prescriptions, which follow Christs example. Both of these can be seen
in Gal 5:24.
24 []
.
24
The ones of Christ Jesus crucified the flesh along with passions and
lusts.
(the ones of Christ) is one of the phrases that Paul uses to identify the
group of true believers in Galatia. That Christ acted as a role model, a prototypical figure
whose behavior should be emulated, is seen in the use of (to crucify). The
Galatians are called to crucify their flesh. While the context makes it clear that this
language is figurative, it still reflects the fact that the Galatians were called to emulate
Christ in their lives. Indeed, many early followers of Jesus literally followed in his
example, losing their lives for their beliefs.
Given that Christ was such an important prototypical figure in the early church,
one would expect Paul to highlight his Christ-like qualities in much the same way that he
highlighted his Jewish heritage. This is exactly what he does. Paul often uses the same
language of crucifixion found in Gal 5:24 when describing himself. Take, for example,
Gal 2:19-20.
19 , .
20 ,
,
.
19
For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live for God. I
have been crucified with Christ. 20 And I no longer live, but Christ lives in
me, and that which I now live in the flesh, I live by faith, that of the son of
God who loved me and who gave himself for me.
209
As a prototypical figure, Christ represented the ideal group member. His behavior set the
standard for what it meant to be a good member of the community and a follower of
Jesus.
This remains true to this day. Sermons often include calls to be Christ like, and
the ubiquitous What would Jesus do? slogan reflects the power that Christ holds as a
prototypical figure in the Christian community. The Christ prototype was also powerful
in the early Jesus movement, and this can be seen here. Paul begins by saying that he has
been crucified with Christ. This mirrors the language seen above and forms a common
theme throughout Galatians. The crucifixion of Christ became the defining event of his
character. His followers were called to follow in his footsteps, to be crucified themselves,
figuratively and often literally. This is not only seen when Paul says that he was crucified
with Christ, but also when he goes on to declare ,
(and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me). Paul is placing the focus on how his life
reflects Christ.
SIT explains why Paul would write about his Christ-like life and why this is a
persuasive technique. Paul writes about his connection to Christ because it makes him
more prototypical. This matches with research that suggests Paul establishes himself as
an example for others to follow. 344 This makes Paul more socially attractive, and makes
him a more effective leader.
It is the worth noting that this is an etic explanation, which is an explanation from
a modern perspective. It explains Pauls choice in light of modern social psychology, and
what it can tell us about normal patterns of human behavior. From an emic perspective,
which is Pauls own perspective, Paul is making a point about the law and its relationship
344
Timothy Wiarda, "Plot and Character in Galatians 1-2," Tyndale Bulletin 55, no. 2 (2004): 231-52.
210
with Christs crucifixion. One of the strengths of an etic approach, like the one adopted
here, is that it allows one to draw connections between texts that are unrelated on an emic
level. For example, take the previous text and Gal 1:10 where Paul describes himself as a
(slave of Christ). While the two texts are not directly related on an emic
level, from an etic perspective one can see that the two texts pursue the same strategy of
increasing Pauls prototypicality. This could even be expanded to include comparisons
between Paul and other authors, or even other religions. It is one of the advantages of an
etic approach.
How Paul ends his letter is significant. Paul ends his letter with a powerful
declaration of his character. Take Gal 6:14:
14
, .
14
But may it never be that I would boast, except in the cross of our Lord
Jesus Christ, through whom the world has been crucified to me and I to
the world.
Here Paul makes a bold declaration, placing his pride in the cross, and declaring that he
has been crucified to the world. It is important to note how the language here speaks to
the unique place that Christ holds in Pauls life. He would never boast, except in the
cross. Paul is setting aside normal points of pride and fully embracing the new standards
established by Christ.
Pauls talk of being crucified to the world continues this theme. It portrays Pauls
life as antithetical to the world. This should not be taken as referring to the physical
world, but rather as Paul no longer having worldly or fleshly advantages dominate
ones thinking or living. 345 All of this language highlights Pauls prototypicality and
345
211
emphasizes his connection to Christ. The language even has an us vs. them quality to
it; Paul as the true follower of Christ verses the world. This makes sense, as it emphasizes
Pauls position within the group, and his adherence to the groups prescriptions. In other
words, it emphasizes Pauls prototypicality.
This has the same effect as the previous passage, of making Paul a more effective
leader. From an emic perspective the two passages are only indirectly related, with 2:1920 being focused on the law and 6:14 leading into the new creation and super ordinate
identity espoused in 6:15. On the other hand, with SIT one can see how these passages
work together to form an overall picture of Paul as a devout follower of Christ. This is
finally driven home in the penultimate verse of Galatians, in 6:17.
17
.
17
From now on let no one give me trouble, for I bear the marks of Jesus in
my body.
This is a powerful statement from Paul. The word (mark) originally referred to
religious tattoos or slave brandings utilized in the Hellenistic world. The text thus evokes
a slave metaphor. 346
This has led some to suggest that early followers of Jesus marked themselves with
tattoos. It is more likely that here Paul is referring to the scars that he received while
being persecuted for his faith. 347 From an emic perspective, it is a powerful statement.
There is no self-indulgent pity here in Pauls statement. Rather, it is a
statement that highlights Pauls relationship to Jesus and his apostleship
established by Jesus. Further more, the statement gives a warning
regarding any continuing judaizing threat within his Galatian churches.
For what takes place in those churches affects him personally as the
346
Jeremy W. Barrier, "Marks of Oppression: A Postcolonial Reading of Paul's Stigmata in Galatians

6:17," Biblical Interpretation 16, no. 4 (2008): 336-62.
347
212
Galatian Christians apostle and evangelist. So he warns that he should not
be troubled further since he is Christs marked man, with those
markings suggesting, positively, that he is under Christs ownership and
protection, as well as, negatively, that those who try to harass him will
come under Christs judgment and retribution. 348
But SIT, an etic approach, takes this understanding farther. Pauls statement is a
provocative image of physical suffering that touches the core of Christs story. Its power
extends beyond the theological threat of judgment. It connects Paul and his life to the
prototypical standards embodied in Christ. This makes Paul more socially attractive and a
more effective leader.
SIT also allows us to connect this passage back to the ones previously mentioned
(Gal 2:19-20, 6:14). They all work together to form a coherent picture of Paul, which
establishes him as a solid member of the community worthy of leading the congregation.
That Paul develops this self image throughout Galatians is remarkable. He must have had
an understanding of how people interacted with one another and reacted to him. The
social identity theory of leadership explains that such a self image was essential for Paul,
as it allowed him to be more influential and effective in leading people who did not know
him personally.
Leadership and the Christ Prototype in Philippians

As one would expect, this is not the only place where Paul uses such rhetoric.
Pauls other letters also show him drawing a strong connection between himself and
Christ. In Phil 3, where Paul is facing issues similar to those in Galatians, he again adopts
this strategy. Pauls declaration of his Jewish identity in Phil 3 was already noted above.
348
213
Additionally, in Phil 3 he combines this with declarations of his identification with
Christ, just as he does in Galatians. Take Phil 3:7-11:
7 [] , . 8

, ,
, 9 ,
,
, 10
[] [] ,
, 11
.
7
But whatever things were profit to me, those I have considered a loss on
account of Christ. 8 Moreover, I consider all things to a loss on account of
the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus, my Lord, for whom I have
suffered the loss of all things, and consider them rubbish so that I may
gain Christ, 9 and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my
own which is of the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the
righteousness of God based upon faith, 10 to know Him and the power of
His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to
His death; 11 so that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.
In the passage Paul emphatically establishes his connection to Christ. Themes of
suffering, loss, death, and resurrection are prevalent throughout the passage. From an
emic perspective, that is Pauls own perspective, the passage is making a theological
point concerning righteousness and the resurrection. Paul has righteousness gained in
faith and not through the law, so that he may know Christ and gain resurrection. Paul
considered his sufferings to be defined by Christs sufferings. 349
From an etic perspective, of SIT, the passage establishes and defends Pauls
prototypicality. This makes him more socially attractive and establishes him as a more
effective leader with those people whom he does not know on a personal level. The
349
Andrew C. Perriman, "The Pattern of Christ's Sufferings: Colossians 1:24 and Philippians 3:10-11,"
Tyndale Bulletin 42, no. 1 (1991): 79.
214
passage immediately follows Pauls statement of his Jewish identity, which ends in v. 6.
Here Paul casts aside those things (v. 7) and firmly roots his identity in Christ.
Beyond his death and resurrection, the figure of Christ is steeped in images of loss
and suffering. Whether it is the abandonment of his disciples, or his agony on the cross,
Christs story is one of loss, suffering, death, and resurrection. As Christ became the
prototype for the Jesus movement, his followers were called to emulate his sacrifice. This
is seen in the gospels where he reportedly calls his followers to take up their cross (Lk
9:23), not a figurative demand at a time when crucifixions still took place. By taking up
these themes here, Paul is tying himself to Christ and making himself more prototypical.
Paul reportedly gives up everything in his quest to know Christ. In v. 8 he
declares, , , (I
have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ).
This not only reflects the example found in Christ, who reportedly sacrificed everything
in his obedience to God, but also follows the demands reportedly made by Christ of his
followers. For example, in Matt 19:21 ,
[] , ,
(Jesus said to him, If you wish to be complete, go and sell your
possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come,
follow me).
Whether or not the saying is historically accurate is beside the point, it reflects
the figure of Christ that existed in the early church. Christ became a role model for his
followers, and he called his followers to follow in his example. Paul emulates this
prototype, and here emphasizes all that he has given up in his service to Christ. Paul
215
brings this to a point in vs. 10-11. Paul speaks of having fellowship with his sufferings
and being conformed to his death, so that he will gain resurrection. The connection
that Paul feels with Christs death and resurrection is clear and powerful. This is not
simply a spiritual declaration. It has a powerful rhetorical effect as it makes Paul more
prototypical and thus makes him a more influential leader.
Passages such as those found in Gal or Phil 3 are often informally described as
defending Pauls authority or apostleship. Authority, and the concept of apostleship are
complicated issues, and SIT does not deal with every aspect of these issues. But SIT does
explain one of the ways in which these issues played out within the communities.
When dealing with people on an impersonal level, the leaders influence is partially
determined by their level of prototypicality. In other words, the better a group member
a person is, the more influential they are.
In the early Jesus movement this is complicated by the fact that there are
competing social identities and standards for group membership. This is further
complicated by the fact that by the first century a lengthy tradition of prophets and
revelation already existed. Beyond all of this, Paul is possibly responding to the claims
made by his opponents, (either about themselves or about Paul). SIT does not fully
explain the situation, but it is useful for highlighting some key features of the text.
It explains why Paul repeatedly emphasizes both his Jewish heritage as well as
his devotion to Christ. The saliency of the Jewish identity, increased by Pauls
opponents both in Galatians and Phil 3, requires Paul to recount his Jewish heritage.
Doing so increases his prototypicality and thus makes him a more effective leader. This
leads directly into his standing as a follower of Christ as a proto-Christian identity is
216
also forming in the community and becoming salient. This also explains why these
passages are often connected to questions of circumcision and the law. These are
prototypes, they form group boundaries. They are particularly relevant when the
groups saliency is high, the same conditions under which a leaders prototypicality
becomes important.
Leadership and the Christ Prototype in 2 Corinthians

Phil 3 is the clearest parallel to the developments taking place in Galatians. The
issues at stake are similar (law, circumcision), and the response from Paul is similar in
each case. He emphasizes his Jewish heritage and his dedication to Christ while
emphasizing the importance of faith. Indeed, Phil 3 has the most complete and explicit
declaration of Pauls Jewish heritage.
But one of the clearest examples of Pauls Christ-like life is found in 2 Cor 11. As
with Phil 3, this chapter appears to be part of a section (ch. 10-13) added to 2
Corinthians. 350 The fragmentary nature of the letter makes it difficult to determine the
exact situation that Paul was responding to. Additionally, the information that can be
gleaned from the fragment does not parallel Galatians as neatly as Phil 3. But there are
some important parallels. In both cases Paul is defending his place of authority within
the early church (2 Cor 10:8, 11:5; Gal 1:15-16) against others whom Paul sees as leading
the church astray (2 Cor 11:3-4; Gal 1:7). Additionally, he uses similar techniques for
defending his authority in both letters. For example, he points out the revelation he
350
Margaret MacDonald, "2 Corinthians," in The Oxford Bible Commentary, ed. John Barton and John
Muddiman, 2 Corinthians (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 1134; Laurence L. Welborn, "The
Identification of 2 Corinthians 10-13 with The "Letter of Tears"," Novum Testamentum 37, no. 2 (1995):
138-53.
217
received from God (2 Cor 12:1-10, Gal 1:11-12,15-16), and defends his standing in
Judaism and as a follower of Jesus.
In both situations, when his position of leadership is threatened, Paul
emphasizes his prototypicality. In 2 Cor 11, unlike Phil 3, his statement of Jewish
identity is short.
22 ; . ; . ;
.
22
Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they

descendants of Abraham? So am I.
Given the uncertainty surrounding the situation in Corinth, it is difficult to know why he
spends so little time emphasizing his Jewish heritage, even less than in Gal 1:13-14. But
it is worth noting that here Paul is explicitly addressing the issue of group membership.
He asks rhetorically, are they Hebrews, Israelites, descendants of Abraham? In other
words, do they belong to this group? After each question, Paul declares his membership.
This short exchange leads into an extensive detailing of Pauls trials as a follower of
Jesus. The theological and literary use of a weakness motif has been documented. 351 SIT
shows how this functions as a measure of prototypicality.
2 Cor 11:23-28 is one of the most dramatic accounts of the trials and challenges
that Paul faced.
351
H Stephen Shoemaker, "2 Corinthians 11:1-21," Review and Expositor 86, no. 3 (1989): 407-14; J. A.
Glancy, "Boasting of Beatings (2 Corinthians 11:23-25)," Journal of Biblical Literature 123, no. 1 (2004):
99-135; David E. Garland, "Paul's Apostolic Authority : The Power of Christ Sustaining Weakness (2
Corinthians 10-13)," Review and Expositor 86, no. 3 (1989): 371-89; Calvin J. Roetzel, "The Language of
War (2 Cor. 10:1-6) and the Language of Weakness (2 Cor. 11:21b-13:10)," Biblical Interpretation 17, no.
1-2 (2009): 77-99; Richard F. Ward, "Pauline Voice and Presence as Strategic Communication," Semeia
65 (1994): 95-107; J. L. Sumney, "Paul's 'Weakness' : An Integral Part of His Conception of Apostleship,"
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 52 (1993): 71-91; Paul A. Mickey, "Strength in Weakness:
From Text to Sermon on 2 Corinthians 12:7-9," Interpretation 22, no. 3 (1968): 288-300; A. R. Brown,
"The Gospel Takes Place: Paul's Theology of Power-in-Weakness in 2 Corinthians," Interpretation 52, no.
3 (1998): 271-85; Jeremy W. Barrier, "Visions of Weakness: Apocalyptic Genre and the Identification of
Paul's Opponents in 2 Corinthians 12:1-6," Restoration Quarterly 47, no. 1 (2005): 33-42.
218
23 ; ,
, , ,
. 24
, 25 , , ,
26 ,
, , , ,
, , ,
, 27 , ,
, , 28
,
.
23
Are they servants of Christ? I speak as if insane, I more so; in far more
labors, in far more imprisonments, beaten times without number, often in
danger of death. 24 Five times from the Jews I received forty minus one
[lashes].25 Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three
times I was shipwrecked, a night and a day I have spent in the open ocean.
26
[I have been on] frequent journeys, in dangers from rivers, dangers from
robbers, dangers from my countrymen, dangers from the Gentiles, dangers
in the city, dangers in the wilderness, dangers on the sea, dangers among
false brethren; 27 labor and hardship, often sleepless, in hunger and thirst,
often without food, in cold and exposure. 28 Apart from such external
things, there is the daily pressure on me, the concern for all the churches.
This passage also begins with a question of identity, mirroring the structure of the
previous verse. Are they servants of Christ, are they group members? 352 Paul declares
that he is more so, and what follows is an argument based upon prototypicality that
establishes his place within the community. Groups and their boundaries are defined by
the groups prototypes. Thus, this argument here over membership revolves around living
by and up to the groups prototypes.
More than that, it is also a question of degree. Paul is arguing that he is a better
servant of Christ, and he does this by arguing that he has suffered more for Christ than his
opponents have. Pauls trials and sufferings follow the example established by Christ.
Paul humbles himself for the work of God and endures great hardship, suffering as Christ
352
For more discussion, see: John N. Collins, "Georgi's "Envoys" In 2 Cor 11:23," Journal of Biblical
Literature 93, no. 1 (1974): 88-96.
219
did. From an etic perspective, of SIT, this amounts to being more prototypical than his
opponents. This prototypicality makes Paul a more effective leader by making him more
socially attractive.
Summary
Returning to Galatians, Paul defends his authority in the early church by
highlighting his prototypicality, thus making himself more socially attractive. This made
him a more effective leader with people whom he did not have a personal relationship.
Pauls declaration of his Jewish identity, found in 1:13-14, was critical given the situation
in Galatia. The nature of the debate in Galatia, over circumcision and the law, made the
Jewish social identity salient. The saliency of this identity increases the importance for
Paul, a leader in the community, to demonstrate his prototypicality. This is why Paul
discusses his Jewish heritage and this is why it was an influential tactic in the early
church.
Paul also emphasizes his Christ-like life, describing himself as a slave to Christ
(1:10), who was crucified with Christ (2:19-20) to the world (6:14). Finally he reminds
the recipients that he bears the marks of Jesus (6:17). This portrayal has the same result,
making Paul more prototypical and a more effective leader. Ultimately Pauls portrayal
of himself in Galatians is intimately tied to the over arching arguments of the letter. On
the other hand, SIT brings out one aspect of his presentation, highlighting how it makes
Paul more prototypical and thus a more persuasive leader.
A similarly rhetorical strategy is seen in both Philippians and 2 Corinthians. The
situation of Phil 3 closely resembles that of Galatians, and the situation of 2 Cor 10-13
220
resembles it in that Paul is defending his authority. In each case Paul adopts a rhetorical
strategy similar to the one found in Galatians, defending his prototypicality and standing
as a good group member. Given the fragmentary nature of the letters, one can only
speculate as to why Paul chose a more extensive Jewish statement for Phil 3, and a more
extensive Christ-like statement for 2 Cor 11. But, SIT explains how these texts were
effective pieces of rhetoric and why they emerged when Paul faced challenges similar to
those in Galatians.
221
Conclusion
This work used SIT in order to understand Galatians. After reviewing SIT, the
work covered the origins of social-scientific criticism in the NT. It examined some of the
methodological assumptions of social-scientific criticism, some of its advantages, and
some of its assumptions. It also looked at some of the foundational works in this area,
such as the work of Gerd Theissen, Bruce Malina, and Wayne Meeks. Finally, the section
ended with a survey of work that has already applied SIT to the NT, including the work
of Philip Esler, who has done significant work on Galatians.
After this, SIT was brought to bear upon the political unrest that surrounded
Jerusalem for hundreds of years. Doing so served two purposes. First, by using SIT to
look at the causes of the various rebellions that occurred, the work identified key aspects
of the Jewish identity, which serve as boundary markers, separating them from other
groups. Second, the uncertainty-identity theory predicted that this social unrest, and the
uncertainty that it created, would have motivated people to identify more strongly with
their social identities. In other words, Jews with strong religious ties to Jerusalem would
have responded to this uncertainty by more strongly identifying with their Jewish faith.
This is likely what happened with Pauls opponents. Although they were followers of
Jesus, they had religious ties with Jerusalem and were probably Jewish. Therefore, the
uncertainty created by the civil unrest in Jerusalem probably motivated them to more
adamantly defend the traditional Jewish practices. As a result, when they were confronted
with the immediate problem of mixed table fellowship, they responded by vigorously
defending their Jewish practice.
222
Next, there was a brief look at the history of rhetorical analysis carried out on the
letter. This work noted some of the pitfalls of research that has been done, and the
inadequacy of analyzing the letter in light of ancient rhetoric. It then examined some of
the similarities and differences between a rhetorical approach and the one taken here.
After this, the analysis of Galatians began in detail by looking at the prototypical
behaviors found in Galatians and how Paul modifies them. Paul addresses the law, a set
of prototypical behaviors, in Galatians in response to his opponents and the behavior of
the people in Galatia. SIT showed that Pauls chosen response, to emphasize faith, the
spirit, and the promise, is effective because it builds upon preexisting group prototypes.
Faith, in this case, is not a Christian concept, it is a Jewish concept. The
faithfulness of the Jewish people to God is one of their defining characteristics, and is
often connected directly to observing the law. Paul instead separates these two concepts,
and emphasizes one (faith) over the other (the law). By separating and reinterpreting
preexisting group prototypes, Paul is able to shift the groups boundaries. The rhetorics
persuasive power rests less on its logical construction than on its ability to make
particular prototypes salient.
Something similar was seen in the next chapter, which looked at Pauls
manipulation of prototypical figures in Galatians. Like prototypical behaviors,
prototypical figures outline what it means to be a good group member. The most
prominent prototypical figures in Galatians are Abraham and Christ. SIT showed that
Pauls arguments surrounding Abraham were persuasive because Paul was reshaping a
prototypical figure. Abraham defined the group. Thus by reshaping his audiences
understanding of Abraham, he was able to reshape the groups boundaries.
223
The following chapter shifted focus slightly and looked at the superordinate
identity that Paul is establishing in Galatians. SIT showed that superordinate identities are
more effective when subordinate identities are protected. Thus Pauls attempts to
establish a superordinate identity are made more persuasive by his reinterpretation of the
law and Abraham. By reinterpreting the traditional Jewish prototypes, he is able to give
the Jewish identity (a subordinate identity) a protected and valued place within the new
superordinate identity. This made it easier for people to adopt the new identity and is one
of the reasons for Pauls success.
Finally, the last chapter focused on Pauls role as a leader in the early church. The
social identity theory of leadership states that leaders who are more prototypical will be
more effective when the groups identity is salient, and when the leader is dealing with
people he or she does not know on a personal level. Therefore, Pauls declarations of his
Jewish heritage and of his sufferings as a follower of Christ make him a more effective
leader. They make him more prototypical, more socially attractive, and thus more
effective.
Hopefully this work is a good example of the valuable insights that can be gained
from applying modern theory to the ancient world. This is in no way intended to
undermine the value and power of understanding the ancient world in its own terms. But I
think that modern scientific and social scientific discoveries are radically changing how
we understand ourselves, and our past. Soon these discoveries will be impossible to
ignore, but by combining them with an appropriate emic understanding, scholars will be
able to explain and understand our past better than every before.
224
Bibliography
Abrams, Dominic, and Michael A. Hogg. "Comments on the Motivational Status of SelfEsteem in Social Identity and Intergroup Discrimination." European Journal of
Social Psychology 18, (1988): 317-34.
. "Social Identification, Self-Categorization and Social Influence." European
Review of Social Psychology 1, (1990): 195-228.
Aland, B., K. Aland, M. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren. The
Greek New Testament. 4th ed. Stuttgart: United Bible Society, 1993.
Alexander, Loveday. "Acts." In The Oxford Bible Commentary, edited by John Barton
and John Muddiman. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Alsup, John E. "Imagining the New: Feminism, Galatians 3:28 and the Current
Interpretive Discussion." Austin Seminary Bulletin 105, no. 2 (1990): 91-108.
Andrews, Herbert T. "The Letter of Aristeas." In Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament,
edited by R. H. Charles. Bellingham: Logos Research Systems, 2004.
Armitage, David. "An Exploration of Conditional Clause Exegesis with Reference to
Galatians 1,8-9." Biblica 88, no. 3 (2007): 365-92.
Ashcraft, Morris. "Paul Defends His Apostleship: Galatians 1 and 2." Review and
Expositor 69, no. 4 (1972): 459-69.
Askwith, E. H. The Epistle to the Galatians. London: Macmillan and Co., 1902.
Bacon, Benjamin W. The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians. New York: The Macmillan
Company, 1909.
Bandstra, Andrew J. "The Law and Angels: Antiquities 15.136 and Galatians 3:19."
Calvin Theological Journal 24, no. 2 (1989): 223-40.
Barclay, J. M. G. "Mirror-Reading a Polemical Letter: Galatians as a Test Case." Journal
for the Study of the New Testament 31, (1987): 73-93.
Barr, Michael L. "Qumran and The "Weakness" Of Paul." Catholic Biblical Quarterly
42, no. 2 (1980): 216-27.
Barrick, William D. "The New Perspective And "Works of the Law" (Gal 2:16 and Rom
3:20)." Master's Seminary Journal 16, no. 2 (2005): 277-92.
Barrier, Jeremy W. "Marks of Oppression: A Postcolonial Reading of Paul's Stigmata in
Galatians 6:17." Biblical Interpretation 16, no. 4 (2008): 336-62.
. "Visions of Weakness: Apocalyptic Genre and the Identification of Paul's
Opponents in 2 Corinthians 12:1-6." Restoration Quarterly 47, no. 1 (2005): 3342.
Bateman IV, Herbert W. "Were the Opponents at Philippi Necessarily Jewish?"
Bibliotheca Sacra 155, (1998): 39-61.
Beek, M. A. Concise History of Israel. Translated by Arnold J. Pomerans. New York:
Harper & Row, 1963.
Bgue, Laurent. "Social Judgment of Abortion: A Black-Sheep Effect in a Catholic
Sheepfold." The Journal of Social Psychology 141, no. 5 (2001): 640-49.
Belleville, Linda L. ""Under Law": Structural Analysis and the Pauline Concept of Law
in Galatians 3:21-4:11." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 26, (1986):
53-78.
Ben-Ner, Avner, Brian P. McCall, Massoud Stephane, and Hua Wang. "Identity and inGroup/out-Group Differentiation in Work and Giving Behaviors: Experimental
225
Evidence." Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 72, no. 1 (2009): 15370.
Betz, Hans Dieter. Galatians. Edited by Helmut Koester, Harold W. Attridge, Adela
Yarbro Collins, Eldon Jay Epp, Hans-Josef Klauck and James M. Robinson,
Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979.
Bilewicz, Michal, and Adrian Wjcik. "Does Identification Predict Community
Involvement? Exploring Consequences of Social Identitfication Amoung the
Jewish Minority in Poland." Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology
20, (2010): 72-79.
Billig, Michael, and Henri Tajfel. "Social Categorization and Similarity in Intergroup
Behaviour." European Journal of Social Psychology 3, no. 1 (1973): 27-52.
Bird, M. F. "Justification as Forensic Declaration and Covenant Membership: A Via
Media between Reformed and Revisionist Readings of Paul." Tyndale Bulletin 57,
no. 1 (2006): 109-30.
Black, David Alan. "The Discourse Structure of Philippians: A Study in Textlinguistics."
Novum Testamentum 37, no. 1 (1995): 16-49.
Bligh, John. Galatians: A Discussion of Paul's Epistle. London: St Paul Publications,
1969.
Blunt, A. W. F. The Episle of Paul to the Galatians. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925.
Boer, Martinus C de. "The Meaning of the Phrase Ta Stoicheia Tou Kosmou in
Galatians." New Testament Studies 53, no. 2 (2007): 204-24.
. "Paul's Use and Interpretation of a Justification Tradition in Galatians 2.15-21."
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 28, no. 2 (2005): 189-216.
Bonneau, Normand. "The Logic of Paul's Argument on the Curse of the Law in Galatians
3:10-14." Novum Testamentum 39, no. 1 (1997): 60-80.
Borchert, G. L. "A Key to Pauline Thinking--Galatians 3:23-29: Faith and the New
Humanity." Review and Expositor 91, no. 2 (1994): 145-51.
Bosveld, Willem, and Willem Koomen. "Estimating Group Size: Effects of Category
Membership, Differential Construal and Selective Exposure." European Journal
of Social Psychology 26, no. 4 (1996): 523-35.
Boucher, Madeleine. "Some Unexplored Parallels to 1 Cor 11:11-12 and Gal 3:28: The
NT on the Role of Women." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 31, no. 1 (1969): 50-58.
Braswell, Joseph P. ""The Blessing of Abraham" Versus "The Curse of the Law":
Another Look at Gal 3:10-13." Westminster Theological Journal 53, no. 1 (1991):
73-91.
Brega, Angela G., and Lerita M. Coleman. "Effects of Religiosity and Racial
Socialization on Subjective Stigmatization in African-American Adolescence."
Journal of Adolescence 22, no. 2 (1999): 223-42.
Brewer, Marilynn B. "The Many Faces of Social Identity: Implications for Political
Psychology." Political Psychology 22, no. 1 (2001): 115-25.
Brewer, Marilynn B., and Wendi Gardner. "Who Is This 'We'? Levels of Collective
Identity and Self Representations." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
71, no. 1 (1996): 83-93.
Brondos, David A. "The Cross and the Curse: Galatians 3.13 and Paul's Doctrine of
Redemption." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 81, (2001): 3-32.
226
Brooks, E. W. Joseph and Asenath, Translation of Early Documents Series II:
Hellenistic-Jewish Texts. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1918.
Brown, A. R. "The Gospel Takes Place: Paul's Theology of Power-in-Weakness in 2
Corinthians." Interpretation 52, no. 3 (1998): 271-85.
Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Galatians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 1982.
Buell, D. K. "The Politics of Interpretation: The Rhetoric of Race and Ethnicity in Paul."
Journal of Biblical Literature 123, no. 2 (2004): 235-51.
Bultmann, Rudolf Karl. Jesus Christ and Mythology. New York: Scribner, 1958.
. The New Testament and Mythology and Other Basic Writings. Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1984.
Burris, Christopher, and Lynne M. Jackson. "Social Identity and the True Believer:
Responses to Threatened Self-Stereotypes among the Intrinsically Religious."
British Journal of Social Psychology 39, no. 2 (2000): 257-78.
Callan, Terrance. "The Style of Galatians." Biblica 88, no. 4 (2007): 496-516.
Cameron, James E. "A Three-Factor Model of Social Identity." Self and Identity 3, no. 3
(2004): 239-62.
Campbell, Donald T. "Common Fate, Similarity, and Other Indices of the Status of
Aggregates of Persons as Social Entities." Behavioral Science 3, (1958): 14-25.
Campbell, William S. "Christianity and Judaism: Continuity and Discontinuity."
International Bulletin of Missionary Research 8, no. 2 (1984): 54-58.
Case, Shirley Jackson. The Social Origins of Christianity. Chicago1923.
. The Social Triumph of the Ancient Church. New York1933.
Charles, R. H. "The Book of Jubilees." In Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, edited
by R. H. Charles. Bellingham: Logos Research Systems, 2004.
Chibici-Revneanu, Nicole. "Leben Im Gesetz: die Paulinische Interpretation von Lev
18:5 (Gal 3:12; Rm 10:5)." Novum Testamentum 50, no. 2 (2008): 105-19.
Choi, Hung-sik. "Pistis in Galatians 5:5-6: Neglected Evidence for the Faithfulness of
Christ." Journal of Biblical Literature 124, no. 3 (2005): 467-90.
Cicero, Lavinia, Antonio Pierro, and Daan van Knippenberg. "Leadership and
Uncertainty: How Role Ambiguity Affects the Relationship between Leader
Group Prototypicality and Leadership Effectiveness." British Journal of
Management 21, (2010): 411-21.
Collins, C John. "Galatians 3:16: What Kind of Exegete Was Paul?" Tyndale Bulletin 54,
no. 1 (2003): 75-86.
Collins, John N. "Georgi's "Envoys" In 2 Cor 11:23." Journal of Biblical Literature 93,
no. 1 (1974): 88-96.
Corley, Bruce C. "Reasoning "By Faith": Whys and Wherefores of the Law in Galatians."
Southwestern Journal of Theology 37, no. 1 (1994): 17-22.
Cosgrove, C. H. "Justification in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Reflection." Journal
of Biblical Literature 106, no. 4 (1987): 653-70.
. "The Law Has Given Sarah No Children (Gal. 4:21-30)." Novum Testamentum
29, no. 3 (1987): 219-35.
. "The Mosaic Law Preaches Faith: A Study in Galatians 3." Westminster
Cranfield, C. E. B. "'the Works of the Law' in the Epistle to the Romans." Journal for the
Study of the New Testament 43, (1991): 89-101.
227
Cranford, M. "The Possibility of Perfect Obedience: Paul and an Implied Premise in
Galatians 3:10 and 5:3." Novum Testamentum 36, no. 3 (1994): 242-58.
Das, A. A. "Oneness in Christ: The Nexus Indivulsus between Justification and
Sanctification in Paul's Letter to the Galatians." Concordia Journal 21, no. 2
(1995): 173-86.
Davis, John J. "Some Reflections on Galatians 3:28, Sexual Roles, and Biblical
Hermeneutics." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 19, no. 3 (1976):
201-08.
De Cremer, D., and M. Van Vugt. "Social Identification Effects in Social Dilemmas: A
Transformation of Motives." European Journal of Social Psychology 29, (1999):
871-93.
Deaux, Kay, Anne Reid, Kim Mizrahi, and Kathleen A. Ethier. "Parameters of Social
Identity." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68, no. 2 (1995): 280-91.
Decker, William B. "The Early Dating of Galatians." Restoration Quarterly 2, no. 3
(1958): 132-38.
Deissmann, Gustav Adolf. Licht vom Osten. Tbingen: Mohr, 1923.
. Light from the Ancient East: The New Testament Illustrated by Recently
Discovered Texts of the Graeco-Roman World. London: Hodder & Stoughton,
1927.
. Paulus: Eine Kultur- und Religions- Geschichtliche Skizze. Tbingen: Mohr,
1911.
Dio's Roman History: Books LXI - LXX. Translated by Earnest Cary, LCL. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1960.
Dockery, D. S. "Introduction to the Epistle and Paul's Defense of His Apostleship
(Galatians 1:1-2:14)." Review and Expositor 91, no. 2 (1994): 153-64.
Doeve, J. W. "Paulus der Phariser und Galater 1:13-15." Novum Testamentum 6, no. 2-3
(1963): 170-81.
Dovidio, J. F., and S. L. Gaertner. "Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism: Historical
Trends and Contemporary Approaches." In Prejudice, Discrimination, and
Racism, edited by J. F. Dovidio and S. L. Gaertner, 1-34. Orlando: Academic
Press, 1986.
Dunn, James D. G., ed. Paul and the Mosaic Law. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.
Eastman, Susan Grove. "'Cast out the Slave Woman and Her Son': The Dynamics of
Exclusion and Inclusion in Galatians 4.30." Journal for the Study of the New
Testament 38, no. 3 (2006): 309-36.
. "The Evil Eye and the Curse of the Law: Galatians 3.1 Revisited." Journal for
the Study of the New Testament 83, (2001): 69-87.
Eggins, Rachael A., S. Alexander Haslam, and Katherine J. Reynolds. "Social Identity
and Negotiation: Subgroup Representation and Superordinate Consensus."
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28, (2002): 887-99.
Elliott, John Hall. What Is Social-Scientific Criticism?, Guides to Biblical Scholarship.
New Testament Series. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.
Erdman, Charles R. The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians. Philadelphia: The Westminster
Press, 1966.
Esler, Philip Francis. Galatians, New Testament Readings. London ; New York:
Routledge, 1998.
228
. "Jesus and the Reduction of Intergroup Conflict: The Parable of the Good
Samaritan in the Light of Social Identity Theory." Biblical Interpretation 8, no. 4
(2000): 325-57.
. "Paul's Contestation of Israel's (Ethnic) Memory of Abraham in Galatians 3."
Biblical Theology Bulletin 36, no. 1 (2006): 23-34.
. "Social Identity, the Virtues, and the Good Life: A New Approach to Romans
12:1-15:13." Biblical Theology Bulletin 33, no. 2 (2003): 51-63.
Eusebius: Books I - V. Translated by Kirsopp Lake, LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1964.
Fee, Gordon D. Galatians. Dorset: Deo Publishing, 2007.
Findlay, G. G. The Epistle to the Galatians. New York: A. C. Armstrong and Son, 1888.
Fowl, Stephen E. "Who Can Read Abraham's Story? Allegory and Interpretive Power in
Galatians." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 55, (1994): 77-95.
Fredrickson, David E. "Envious Enemies of the Cross of Christ (Philippians 3:18)." Word
& World 28, no. 1 (2008): 22-28.
Fuller, Daniel P. "Paul and the Works of the Law." Westminster Theological Journal 38,
no. 1 (1975): 28-42.
Fung, Ronald Y. K. The Epistle to the Galatians. Grand Rapids: Michigan, 1988.
Gabris, Karol. "Zur Kraft der Verheissungen : zum Gal 3:15-22." Communio Viatorum
11, no. 4 (1968): 251-64.
Garland, D. E. "Paul's Defense of the Truth of the Gospel Regarding Gentiles (Galatians
2:15-3:22)." Review and Expositor 91, no. 2 (1994): 165-81.
Garland, David E. "Paul's Apostolic Authority : The Power of Christ Sustaining
Weakness (2 Corinthians 10-13)." Review and Expositor 86, no. 3 (1989): 371-89.
Garlington, Don. ""Even We Have Believed": Galatians 2:15-16 Revisited." Criswell
Theological Review 7, no. 1 (2009): 3-28.
. "Paul's "Partisan " And the Question of Justification in Galatians." Journal of
Gaventa, B. R. "Galatians 1 and 2: Autobiography as Paradigm." Novum Testamentum
28, no. 4 (1986): 309-26.
. "Is Galatians Just a 'Guy Thing'? A Theological Reflection." Interpretation 53,
no. 3 (2000): 267-78.
Glancy, J. A. "Boasting of Beatings (2 Corinthians 11:23-25)." Journal of Biblical
Literature 123, no. 1 (2004): 99-135.
Glick, P., and S. T. Fiske. "The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating Hostile
and Benevolent Sexism." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70,
(1996): 491-512.
Goddard, A. J., and S. A. Cummins. "Ill or Ill-Treated? Conflict and Persecution as the
Context of Paul's Original Ministry in Galatia (Galatians 4:12-20)." Journal for
Goethals, George R. "A Century of Social Psychology: Individuals, Ideas, and
Investigations." In The Sage Handbook of Social Psychology, edited by Michael
Hogg and Joel Cooper, 3-23. London: Sage Publications, 2007.
Gombis, Timothy G. "The 'Transgressor' and the 'Curse of the Law': The Logic of Paul's
Argument in Galatians 2-3." New Testament Studies 53, no. 1 (2007): 81-93.
229
Gonzlez, Roberto, Jorge Manzi, Jos L. Saiz, Brewer Marilynn, Pablo de Tezanos-Pinto,
David Torres, Maria Teresa Aravena, and Nerea Aldunate. "Interparty Attitudes
in Chile: Coalitions as Superordinate Social Identities." Political Psychology 29,
no. 1 (2008): 93-118.
Goodrich, John K. "Guardians, Not Taskmasters: The Cultural Resonances of Paul's
Metaphor in Galatians 4.1-2." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 32, no.
3 (2010): 251-84.
Gordon, T. D. "The Problem at Galatia." Interpretation 41, no. 1 (1987): 32-43.
Grant, Michael. The History of Ancient Israel. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1984.
Grant, R. M. "Neither Male nor Female." Biblical Research 37, (1992): 5-14.
Greenfield, Emily A., and Nadine F. Marks. "Religious Social Identity as an Explanatory
Factor for Associations between More Frequent Formal Religious Participation
and Psychological Well-Being." International Journal for the Psychology of
Religion 17, no. 3 (2007): 245-59.
Grieve, Paul G., and Michael A. Hogg. "Subjective Uncertainty and Intergroup
Discrimination in the Minimal Group Situation." Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin 25, (1999): 926-40.
Grindheim, Sigurd. "Apostate Turned Prophet: Paul's Prophetic Self-Understanding and
Prophetic Hermeneutic with Special Reference to Galatians 3.10-12." New
Hahn, Scott. "Covenant, Oath, and the Aqedah: Diathk in Galatians 3:15-18." Catholic
Biblical Quarterly 67, no. 1 (2005): 79-100.
Hakola, Raimo. "The Burden of Ambiguity: Nicodemus and the Social Identity of the
Johannine Christians." New Testament Studies 55, no. 4 (2009): 438-55.
Hamerton-Kelly, Robert G. "Sacred Violence And "Works of Law": "Is Christ then an
Agent of Sin?" (Galatians 2:17)." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 52, no. 1 (1990):
55-75.
Hamilton, David L., and Steven J. Sherman. "Perceiving Persons and Groups."
Psychological Review 103, no. 2 (1996): 336-55.
Hanson, Anthony T. "The Origin of Paul's Use of Paidagogos for the Law." Journal for
Haraguchi, Takaaki. "Words of Blessing and Curse: A Rhetorical Study of Galatians."
Asia Journal of Theology 18, no. 1 (2004): 33-50.
Harrill, J Albert. "Coming of Age and Putting on Christ: The Toga Virilis Ceremony, Its
Paraenesis, and Paul's Interpretation of Baptism in Galatians." Novum
Testamentum 44, no. 3 (2002): 252-77.
Hays, Richard B. "Christology and Ethics in Galatians: The Law of Christ." Catholic
Biblical Quarterly 49, no. 2 (1987): 268-90.
. "Three Dramatic Roles: The Law in Romans 3-4." In Paul and the Mosaic Law,
edited by James D. G. Dunn, 151-64. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 2001.
Heckl, Raik. "Ein Bezugstext Fr Gal 3:21b." Novum Testamentum 45, no. 3 (2003): 26064.
Heidebrecht, Doug. "Distinction and Function in the Church: Reading Galatians 3:28 in
Context." Direction 34, no. 2 (2005): 181-93.
Herodotus: Books I and II. Translated by A. D. Godley, LCL. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1963.
230
Hester, James D. "The Rhetorical Structure of Galatians 1:11-2:14." Journal of Biblical
Literature 103, no. 2 (1984): 223-33.
Hodge, Caroline E. Johnson. "Apostle to the Gentiles: Constructions of Paul's Identity."
Biblical Interpretation 13, no. 3 (2005): 270-88.
Hogg, Michael A. "Influence and Leadership." In The Handbook of Social Psychology,
edited by S. T. Fiske, Daniel Todd Gilbert and Gardner Lindzey, 1166-207. New
York: Wiley, 2010.
. "Social Identity Theory." In Contemporary Social Psychological Theories,
edited by Peter J. Burke, 111-36. Stanford: Stanford Social Sciences, 2006.
. "A Social Identity Theory of Leadership." Personality and Social Psychology
Review 5, (2001): 184-200.
. "Uncertainty-Identity Theory." In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
edited by Mark P. Zanna, 69-126. San Diego: Elsevier Academic Press, 2007.
. "Uncertainty, Social Identity, and Ideology." In Advances in Group Processes,
edited by S. R. Thye and E. J. Lawler, 203-29. New York: Elsevier, 2005.
Hogg, Michael A., and Dominic Abrams. Social Identifications: A Social Psychology of
Intergroup Relations and Group Processes. London: Routledge, 1988.
Hogg, Michael A., Janice R. Adelman, and Robert D. Blagg. "Religion in the Face of
Uncertainty: An Uncertainty-Identity Theory Account of Religiousness."
Personality and Social Psychology Review 14, (2010): 72-83.
Hogg, Michael A., Louise Cooper-Shaw, and David W. Holzworth. "Group
Prototypicality and Depersonalized Attraction in Small Interactive Groups."
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 19, (1993): 452-65.
Hogg, Michael A., Kelly S. Fielding, Daniel Johnson, Barbara Masser, Emily Russell,
and Alicia Svensson. "Demographic Category Membership and Leadership in
Small Groups: A Social Identity Analysis." The Leadership Quarterly 17, (2006):
335-50.
Hogg, Michael A., and S. C. Hains. "Friendship and Group Identification: A New Look
at the Role of Cohesiveness in Groupthink." European Journal of Social
Psychology 28, (1998): 323-41.
Hogg, Michael A., Elizabeth A. Hardie, and Katherine J. Reynolds. "Prototypical
Similarity, Self-Categorization, and Depersonalized Attraction: A Perspective on
Group Cohesiveness." European Journal of Social Psychology 25, (1995): 15977.
Hogg, Michael A., Robin Martin, Olga Epitropaki, Aditi Mankad, Alicia Svensson, and
Karen Weeden. "Effective Leadership in Salient Groups: Revisiting LeaderMember Exchange Theory from the Perspective of the Social Identity Theory of
Leadership." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 31, (2005): 991-1004.
Hogg, Michael A., David K. Sherman, Joel Dierselhuis, Angela T. Maitner, and Graham
Moffitt. "Uncertainty, Entitativity, and Group Identification." Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology 43, (2007): 135-42.
Hogg, Michael A., and Deborah J. Terry. Social Identity Processes in Organizational
Contexts. Philadelphia: Psychology Press, 2001.
Holloway, Paul A. "The Apocryphal Epistle to the Laodiceans and the Partitioning of
Philippians." Harvard Theological Review 91, no. 3 (1998): 321-25.
231
Holtz, Traugott. "Die Bedeutung des Apostelkonzils Fr Paulus." Novum Testamentum
16, no. 2 (1974): 110-48.
Hong, In-Gyu. "Does Paul Misrepresent the Jewish Law? Law and Covenant in Gal 3:114." Novum Testamentum 36, no. 2 (1994): 164-82.
Hopko, T. "Galatians 3:28: An Orthodox Interpretation." St. Vladimir's Theological
Quarterly 35, no. 2-3 (1991): 169-86.
Hornsey, Matthew J., and Michael A. Hogg. "The Effects of Status on Subgroup
Relations." British Journal of Social Psychology 41, (2002): 203-18.
. "Intergroup Similarity and Subgroup Relations: Some Implications for
Assimilation." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 26, (2000): 948-58.
. "Subgroup Relations: A Comparison of Mutual Intergroup Differentiation and
Common Ingroup Identity Models of Prejudice Reduction." Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin 26, (2000): 242-56.
Horrell, David G., ed. Social-Scientific Approaches to New Testament Interpretation.
Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1999.
House, H. W. "A Biblical View of Women in the Ministry: Part 1 (of 5 Parts): 'Neither ...
Male nor Female ... In Christ Jesus,'." Bibliotheca Sacra 145, (1988): 47-56.
. "A Biblical View of Women in the Ministry: Part 3 (of 5 Parts): The Speaking of
Women and the Prohibition of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 145, no. 579 (1988):
301-18.
Huddy, Leonie. "Contrasting Theoretical Approaches to Intergroup Relations." Political
Psychology 25, no. 6 (2004): 947-67.
Hunn, Debbie. "Ean M in Galatians 2:16: A Look at Greek Literature." Novum
Testamentum 49, no. 3 (2007): 281-90.
. "Pistis Xristou in Galatians 2:16: Clarification from 3:1-6." Tyndale Bulletin 57,
no. 1 (2006): 23-33.
Hunt, Stephen. "'Neither Here nor There': The Construction of Identities and Boundary
Maintenance of West African Pentecostals." Sociology 36, no. 1 (2002): 147-69.
Hurtado, Larry W. "The Jerusalem Collection and the Book of Galatians." Journal for the
Study of the New Testament 5, (1979): 46-62.
Isenberg, Daniel J. "Group Polarization: A Critical Review and Meta-Analysis." Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology 50, (1986): 1141-51.
Johnson, H Wayne. "The Paradigm of Abraham in Galatians 3:6-9." Trinity Journal 8,
no. 2 (1987): 179-99.
Johnson, S. Lewis. "Paul And "The Israel of God": An Exegetical and Eschatological
Case-Study." Master's Seminary Journal 20, no. 1 (2009): 41-55.
Josephus: Jewish Antiquities Books XVIII - XIX. Translated by Louis H. Feldman, LCL.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000.
Josephus: The Jewish War Books I-II. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray, LCL.
Josephus: The Jewish War Books III-IV. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray, LCL.
Jowitt, Claire. "'Inward' and 'Outward' Jews: Margaret Fell, Circumcision, and Women's
Preaching." Reformation 4, (1999): 139-67.
Kahl, B. "No Longer Male: Masculinity Struggles Behind Galatians 3.28?" Journal for
232
Karau, S. J., and K. D. Williams. "Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and
Theoretical Integration." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65,
(1993): 681-706.
Kautsky, Karl. Der Ursprung des Christentums. Eine historische Untersuchung.
Stuttgart1908.
. Foundations of Christianity: A Study in Christian Origins. London: Orbach &
Chambers, 1925.
Kern, Philip H. Rhetoric and Galatians. Edited by Richard Bauckham, Society for New
Testament Studies: Monograph Series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1998.
Koptak, Paul E. "Rhetorical Identification in Paul's Autobiographical Narrative: Galatians
1:13-2:14." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 40, (1990): 97-113.
Lambrecht, Jan. "Abraham and His Offspring: A Comparison of Galatians 5,1 with 3,13."
Biblica 80, no. 4 (1999): 525-36.
. "Paul's Reasoning in Galatians 2:11-21." In Paul and the Mosaic Law, edited by
James D. G. Dunn, 53-74. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 2001.
Lamoreaux, Jason T. "Social Identity, Boundary Breaking, and Ritual: Saul's Recruitment
on the Road to Damascus." Biblical Theology Bulletin 38, no. 3 (2008): 122-34.
Lategan, Bernard. "Is Paul Defending His Apostleship in Galatians?" New Testament
Studies 34, (1988): 411-30.
Laurin, Kristin, Aaron C. Kay, and David A. Moscovitch. "On the Belief in God:
Towards an Understanding of the Emotional Substrates of Compensatory
Control." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 44, no. 6 (2008): 1559-62.
Lea, T. D. "Unscrambling the Judaizers: Who Were Paul's Opponents?" Southwestern
Journal of Theology 37, no. 1 (1994): 23-29.
Lewis, Amy, and Steven J. Sherman. "Perceived Entitativity and the Black-Sheep Effect:
When Will We Denigrate Negative Ingroup Members?" The Journal of Social
Psychology 150, no. 2 (2010): 211-25.
Lienemann-Perrin, Christine. "The Biblical Foundations for a Feminist and Participatory
Theology of Mission." International Review of Mission 93, no. 368 (2004): 17-34.
Lindsay, Dennis R. "Works of Law, Hearing of Faith and Pistis Christou in Galatians
2:16:-3:5." Stone-Campbell Journal 3, no. 1 (2000): 79-88.
Longenecker, Richard N. ""Faith of Abraham" Theme in Paul, James and Hebrews: A
Study in the Circumstantial Nature of New Testament Teachings." Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 20, no. 3 (1977): 203-12.
. Galatians. Edited by Ralph P. Martin. Vol. 41, Word Biblical Commentary.
Dallas: Texas, 1990.
. "Graphic Illustrations of a Believer's New Life in Christ: Galatians 4:21-31."
Review and Expositor 91, no. 2 (1994): 183-99.
. "The Pedagogical Nature of the Law in Galatians 3:19-4:7." Journal of the
Lopez, D. C. "Paul, Gentiles, and Gender Paradigms." Union Seminary Quarterly Review
59, no. 3-4 (2005): 92-106.
Loubser, G. M. H. "Life in the Spirit as Wise Remedy for the Folly of the Flesh: Ethical
Notes from Galatians." Neotestamentica 43, no. 2 (2009): 354-71.
233
Lowe, Stephen Douglas. "Rethinking the Female Status/Function Question: The
Jew/Gentile Relationship as Paradigm." Journal of the Evangelical Theological
Society 34, no. 1 (1991): 59-75.
Lull, David John. ""The Law Was Our Pedagogue": A Study in Galatians 3:19-25."
Journal of Biblical Literature 105, no. 3 (1986): 481-98.
MacDonald, Dennis Ronald. There Is No Male and Female: The Fate of a Dominical
Saying in Paul and Gnosticism. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987.
MacDonald, Margaret. "2 Corinthians." In The Oxford Bible Commentary, edited by John
Barton and John Muddiman, 1134-51. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Mackie, Diane M. "Social Identification Effects in Group Polarization." Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 50, (1986): 720-28.
Mageto, Peter. "Toward an Ethic of Shared Responsibility in Galatians 5:13-15."
Evangelical Review of Theology 30, no. 1 (2006): 86-94.
Maier, C. M. "Psalm 87 as a Reappraisal of the Zion Tradition and Its Reception in
Galatians 4:26." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 69, no. 3 (2007): 473-86.
Malina, Bruce J. The New Testament World : Insights from Cultural Anthropology. 3rd
ed. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001.
Mansoor, Menahem. Jewish History and Thought: An Introduction. Hoboken: Ktav
Publishing House, 1991.
Marcus, J. "'under the Law': The Background of a Pauline Expression." Catholic Biblical
Quarterly 61, no. 1 (2001): 72-83.
Martin, Troy W. "The Brother Body: Addressing and Describing the Galatians and the
Agitators as Adelphoi." Biblical Research 47, (2002): 5-18.
. "The Covenant of Circumcision (Genesis 17:9-14) and the Situational Antithesis
in Galatians 3:28." Journal of Biblical Literature 122, no. 1 (2003): 111-25.
. "Whose Flesh? What Temptation? (Galatians 4:13-14)." Journal for the Study of
the New Testament 74, (1999): 65-91.
Marx, K., and F. Engels. On Religion. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House,
1957.
Mastro, Dana E., Ron Tamborini, and Craig R. Hullett. "Linking Media to Prototype
Activation and Subsequent Celebrity Attraction: : An Application of SelfCategorization Theory." Communication Research 32, (2005): 323-48.
Matera, Frank J. Galatians. Edited by Daniel J. Harrington, Sacra Pagina Series.
Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1992.
. "Galatians and the Development of Paul's Teaching on Justification." Word &
World 20, no. 3 (2000): 239-48.
. "Galatians in Perspective: Cutting a New Path through Old Territory."
Interpretation 54, no. 3 (2000): 233-45.
Matlock, R. Barry. "The Rhetoric of in Paul: Galatians 2.16, 3.22, Romans 3.22,
and Philippians 3.9." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 30, no. 2 (2007):
173-203.
McCartney, D. G. "No Grace without Weakness." Westminster Theological Journal 61,
no. 1 (1999): 1-13.
Meeks, Wayne A. The First Urban Christians : The Social World of the Apostle Paul.
2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003.
234
Mickey, Paul A. "Strength in Weakness: From Text to Sermon on 2 Corinthians 12:7-9."
Mullins, Terence Y. "Paul's Thorn in the Flesh." Journal of Biblical Literature 76, no. 4
(1957): 299-303.
Murray, Robert. "Philippians." In The Oxford Bible Commentary, edited by John Barton
and John Muddiman, 1179-90. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Myers, David G., and Helmut Lamm. "The Group Polarization Phenomenon."
Psychological Bulletin 83, (1976): 602-27.
Newcomb, T. M. Personality and Social Change: Attitude Formation in a Student
Community. New York: Dryden Press, 1943.
O'Brien, Kelli S. "The Curse of the Law (Galatians 3.13): Crucifixion, Persecution, and
Deuteronomy 21.22-23." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 29, no. 1
(2006): 55-76.
Oesterley, W. O. E. "1 Maccabees." In Apocrypha of the Old Testament, edited by R. H.
Charles. Bellingham: Logos Research Systems, 2004.
. A History of Israel. Vol. 2. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1951.
Oesterley, W. O. E., and G. H. Box. "Sirach." In Apocrypha of the Old Testament, edited
by R. H. Charles. Bellingham: Logos Research Systems, 2004.
Owen, Paul. "The "Works of the Law" In Romans and Galatians: A New Defense of the
Subjective Genitive." Journal of Biblical Literature 126, no. 3 (2007): 553-77.
Park, David M. "Paul's Skolops T Sarki: Thorn or Stake (2 Cor 12:7)." Novum
Testamentum 22, no. 2 (1980): 179-83.
Pentecost, J Dwight. "Purpose of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 128, no. 511 (1971): 22733.
Perkins, Pheme. "Not through the Law." Christian Century 106, no. 19 (1989): 587.
Perriman, Andrew C. "The Pattern of Christ's Sufferings: Colossians 1:24 and Philippians
3:10-11." Tyndale Bulletin 42, no. 1 (1991): 62-79.
Pierro, Antonio, Lavinia Cicero, Marino Bonaiuto, Daan van Knippenberg, and Arie W.
Kruglanski. "Leader Group Prototypicality and Leadership Effectiveness: The
Moderating Role of Need for Cognitive Closure." The Leadership Quarterly 16,
(2005): 503-16.
Pittinsky, Todd L., and Brian Welle. "Negative Outgroup Leader Actions Increase Liking
for Ingroup Leaders: An Experimental Test of Intergroup Leader-Enhancement
Effects." Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 11, (2008): 513-23.
Popkes, Enno Edzard. ""Bevor einer von Jakobus kam...": Anmerkungen zur
Textkritischen und Theologiegeschichtlichen Problematik von Gal 2,12." Novum
Testamentum 46, no. 3 (2004): 253-64.
Popkes, Wiard. "Two Interpretations Of "Justification" In the New Testament:
Reflections on Galatians 2:15-21 and James 2:21-25." Studia Theologica 59, no. 2
(2005): 129-46.
Punt, Jeremy. "Revealing Rereading. Part 1: Pauline Allegory in Galatians 4:21-5:1."
Neotestamentica 40, no. 1 (2006): 87-100.
. "Revealing Rereading. Part 2: Paul and the Wives of the Father of Faith in
Galatians 4:21-5:1." Neotestamentica 40, no. 1 (2006): 101-18.
. "Subverting Sarah in the New Testament: Galatians 4 and 1 Peter 3." Scriptura
96, (2007): 453-68.
235
Pyne, R. A. "The 'Seed,' the Spirit, and the Blessing of Abraham." Bibliotheca Sacra 152,
(1995): 211-22.
Reed, Jeffrey T. "Philippians 3:1 and the Epistolary Hesitation Formulas: The Literary
Integrity of Philippians, Again." Journal of Biblical Literature 115, no. 1 (1996):
63-90.
Reid, Anne, and Kay Deaux. "Relationship between Social and Personal Identities:
Segregation or Integration." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71, no.
6 (1996): 1084-91.
Reid, Scott A., and Michael A. Hogg. "Uncertainty Reduction, Self-Enhancement, and
Ingroup Identification." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 31, (2005):
804-17.
Renteln, Alison Dundes. "Visual Religious Symbols and the Law." American Behavioral
Scientist 47, no. 12 (2004): 1573-96.
Rhoads, David M. "Children of Abraham, Children of God: Metaphorical Kinship in
Paul's Letter to the Galatians." Currents in Theology and Mission 31, no. 4
(2004): 282-97.
Roetzel, Calvin J. "The Language of War (2 Cor. 10:1-6) and the Language of Weakness
(2 Cor. 11:21b-13:10)." Biblical Interpretation 17, no. 1-2 (2009): 77-99.
Rowatt, Wade C., Lewis M. Franklin, and Marla Cotton. "Patterns and Personality
Correlates of Implicit and Explicit Attitudes toward Christians and Muslims."
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 44, no. 1 (2005): 29-43.
Russell, R. "Redemptive Suffering and Paul's Thorn in the Flesh." Journal of the
Russell, W. "Who Were Paul's Opponents in Galatia?" Bibliotheca Sacra 147, no. 587
(1990): 329-50.
Sanders, Jack T. "Paul's Autobiographical Statements in Galatians 1-2." Journal of
Sani, Fabio, and Steve Reicher. "Contested Identities and Schisms in Groups: Opposing
the Ordination of Women as Priests in the Church of England." British Journal of
Social Psychology 39, no. 1 (2000): 95-112.
. "Identity, Argument and Schism: Two Longitudinal Studies of the Split in the
Church of England over the Ordination of Women to the Priesthood." Group
Processes & Intergroup Relations 2, no. 3 (1999): 279-300.
Schreiner, Thomas R. "Is Perfect Obedience to the Law Possible: A Re-Examination of
Galatians 3:10." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27, no. 2 (1984):
151-60.
. "Paul and Perfect Obedience to the Law: An Evaluation of the View of E. P.
Sanders." Westminster Theological Journal 47, no. 2 (1985): 245-78.
Scott, Ian W. "Common Ground? The Role of Galatians 2.16 in Paul's Argument." New
Sedikides, C., and M. J. Strube. "Self-Evaluation: To Thine Own Self Be Good, to Thine
Own Self Be Sure, to Thine Own Self Be True, and to Thine Own Self Be
Better." In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, edited by M. P. Zanna,
209-96. New York: Academic Press, 1997.
Sellew, Philip. "Laodiceans and Philippians Revisited: A Response to Paul Holloway."
Harvard Theological Review 91, no. 3 (1998): 327-29.
236
. "Laodiceans and the Philippians Fragments Hypothesis." Harvard Theological
Review 87, no. 1 (1994): 17-28.
Shauf, Scott. "Galatians 2.20 in Context." New Testament Studies 52, no. 1 (2006): 86101.
Sherman, David K., Michael A. Hogg, and Angela T. Maitner. "Perceived Polarization:
Reconciling Ingroup and Intergroup Perceptions under Uncertainty." Group
Processes & Intergroup Relations 12, (2009): 95-109.
Shoemaker, H Stephen. "2 Corinthians 11:1-21." Review and Expositor 86, no. 3 (1989):
407-14.
Silva, Moiss. "Abraham, Faith, and Works: Paul's Use of Scripture in Galatians 3:6-14."
Westminster Theological Journal 63, no. 2 (2001): 251-67.
. "Betz and Bruce on Galatians." Westminster Theological Journal 45, no. 2
(1983): 371-85.
Smith, Joanne R., Michael A. Hogg, Robin Martin, and Deborah J. Terry. "Uncertainty
and the Influence of Group Norms in the Attitude-Behaviour Relationship."
British Journal of Social Psychology no. 46 (2007): 769-92.
Smith, Michael J. "The Role of the Pedagogue in Galatians." Biliotheca Sacra 163, no.
650 (2006): 197-214.
Smith, Neil G. "Thorn That Stayed: An Exposition of 2 Corinthians 12:7-9."
Smith, T. W. "Actual Trends or Measurement Artifacts? A Review of Three Studies of
Anti-Semitism; the Polls - a Review " Public Opinion Quarterly 57, (1993): 38093.
Snodgrass, K. "Spheres of Influence: A Possible Solution to the Problem of Paul and the
Law." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 32, (1988): 93-113.
Stanton, G. N. "Galatians." In The Oxford Bible Commentary, edited by John Barton and
John Muddiman, 1152-65. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Stenschke, Christoph W. "Hinweise Zu Einem Wiederentdeckten Gebiet der
Actaforschung (I) und Zu Zwei Bemerkenswerten Monographien Zu
Apostelgeschichte 13f und zum Galaterbrief (II)." Communio Viatorum 41, no. 1
(1999): 65-91.
Stevens, Gerald L. "Paul and the Law in Galatians." Theological Educator: A Journal of
Theology and Ministry 50, (1994): 95-104.
Strickland, Wayne G. "Preunderstanding and Daniel Fuller's Law-Gospel Continuum."
Bibliotheca Sacra 144, no. 574 (1987): 181-93.
Strmer, S., and B. Simon. "Collective Action: Towards a Dual-Pathway Model."
European Review of Social Psychology 15, (2004): 59-99.
Sumney, J. L. "Paul's 'Weakness' : An Integral Part of His Conception of Apostleship."
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 52, (1993): 71-91.
Surburg, Mark P. "Ancient Rhetorical Criticism, Galatians, and Paul at Twenty-Five
Years." Concordia Journal 30, no. 1-2 (2004): 13-39.
Swim, J., K. J. Aikin, W. S. Hall, and B. A. Hunter. "Sexism and Racism: Old-Fashioned
and Modern Prejudices." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68,
(1995): 199-214.
Tajfel, Henri. "Quantitative Judgement in Social Perception." British Journal of
Psychology 50, (1959): 16-29.
237
. "Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations." Annual Review of Psychology 33,
(1982): 1-39.
. "Some Developments in European Social Psychology." European Journal of
Social Psychology 2, no. 3 (1972): 307-21.
Tajfel, Henri, M. Billig, R. P. Bundy, and C. Flament. "Social Categorization and
Intergroup Behaviour." European Journal of Social Psychology 1, (1971): 14977.
Tajfel, Henri, Alan Richardson, and Louis Everstine. "Individual Consistencies in
Categorizing: A Study of Judgmental Behavior." Journal of Personality 32, no. 1
(1964): 90-108.
Tajfel, Henri, and J. C. Turner. "An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict." In The
Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, edited by William G. Austin and
Stephen Worchel, 33-47. Monterey: Brooks/Cole, 1979.
Talbert, Charles H. "Freedom and Law in Galatians." Ex Auditu 11, (1995): 17-28.
Taylor, N. H. "Paul's Apostolic Legitimacy: Autobiographical Reconstruction in Gal.
1:11-2:14." Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 83, (1993): 65-77.
Taylor, Willard H. Galatians Ephesians. Edited by William M Greathouse and Willard
H. Taylor. Vol. 8, Beacon Bible Expositions. Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press,
1981.
Tellbe, Mikael. "The Sociological Factors Behind Philippians 3.1-11 and the Conflict at
Philippi." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 55, (1994): 97-121.
Terry, Deborah J., and Michael A. Hogg. "Group Norms and the Attitude-Behavior
Relationship: A Role for Group Identification." Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin 22, (1996): 776-93.
Theissen, Gerd. "The Wandering Radicals: Light Shed by the Sociology of Literature on
the Early Transmission of Jesus Sayings." In Social-Scientific Approaches to New
Testament Interpretation, edited by David G. Horrell, 93-121. Edinburgh: T & T
Clark, 1999.
Theissen, Gerd, Gerd Theissen, and Gerd Theissen. Sociology of Early Palestinian
Christianity. 1st American ed. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1978.
Tobin, T. H. "What Shall We Say That Abraham Found? The Controversy Behind
Romans 4." Harvard Theological Review 88, no. 4 (1995): 437-52.
Tolmie, D. Francois. Persuading the Galatians: A Text-Centered Rhetorical Analysis of a
Pauline Letter. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005.
Tyson, Joseph B. "Paul's Opponents in Galatia." Novum Testamentum 10, no. 4 (1968):
241-54.
. ""Works of Law" In Galatians." Journal of Biblical Literature 92, no. 3 (423431): 423-32.
Udoh, Fabian E. "Paul's Views on the Law: Questions About Origin (Gal 1:6-2:21; Phil
3:2-11)." Novum Testamentum 42, no. 3 (2000): 214-37.
Ukwuegbu, Bernard O. "Paraenesis, Identity-Defining Norms, or Both? Galatians 5:136:10 in the Light of Social Identity Theory." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 70, no. 3
(2008): 538-59.
van den Bos, Kees, Jitse van Ameijde, and Hein van Gorp. "On the Psychology of
Religion: The Role of Personal Uncertainty in Religious Worldview Defense."
Basic & Applied Social Psychology 28, no. 4 (2006): 333-41.
238
Verkuyten, Maykel. "Religious Group Identification and Inter-Religious Relations: A
Study among Turkish-Dutch Muslims." Group Processes & Intergroup Relations
10, no. 3 (2007): 341-57.
Verkuyten, Maykel, and Ali Aslan Yildiz. "National (Dis)Identification and Ethnic and
Religious Identity: A Study among Turkish-Dutch Muslims." Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin 33, no. 10 (2007): 1448-62.
Vos, J. S. "Paul's Argumentation in Galatians 1--2." Harvard Theological Review 87, no.
1 (1994): 1-16.
Waetjen, H. C. "The Trust of Abraham and the Trust of Jesus Christ: Romans 1:17."
Currents in Theology and Mission 30, no. 6 (2003): 446-54.
Wainwright, Allan. "Where Did Silas Go (and What Was His Connection with
Galatians)." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 8, (1980): 66-70.
Walden, Wayne. "Galatians 3:28: Grammar Observations." Restoration Quarterly 51, no.
1 (2009): 45-50.
Walker, William O. "Galatians 2:7b-8 as a Non-Pauline Interpolation." Catholic Biblical
Quarterly 65, no. 4 (2003): 568-87.
. "Galatians 2:8 and the Question of Paul's Apostleship." Journal of Biblical
Literature 123, no. 2 (2004): 323-27.
Wallace, Daniel B. "Galatians 3:19-20: A Crux Interpretum for Paul's View of the Law."
Westminster Theological Journal 52, no. 2 (1990): 225-45.
Wallis, Wilber B. "The Pauline Conception of the Old Covenant." Prebyterion 4, no. 2
(1978): 71-83.
Wanamaker, C. A. "A Case against Justification by Faith." Journal of Theology for
Southern Africa 42, (1983): 37-49.
Ward, Richard F. "Pauline Voice and Presence as Strategic Communication." Semeia 65,
(1994): 95-107.
Ward, Roy Bowen. "The Opponents of Paul." Restoration Quarterly 10, no. 4 (1967):
185-95.
Wedderburn, A. J. M. "Some Observations on Paul's Use of the Phrases "In Christ" And
"With Christ"." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 25, (1985): 83-97.
Weeks, Matthew, and Mark A. Vincent. "Using Religious Affiliation to Spontaneously
Categorize Others." International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 17, no. 4
(2007): 317-31.
Weima, J. A. D. "Gal. 6:11-18: A Hermeneutical Key to the Galatian Letter." Calvin
Welborn, Laurence L. "The Identification of 2 Corinthians 10-13 with The "Letter of
Tears"." Novum Testamentum 37, no. 2 (1995): 138-53.
Wiarda, Timothy. "Plot and Character in Galatians 1-2." Tyndale Bulletin 55, no. 2
(2004): 231-52.
Williams, S. K. "Justification and the Spirit in Galatians." Journal for the Study of the
New Testament 29, (1987): 91-100.
. "Promise in Galatians: A Reading of Paul's Reading of Scripture." Journal of
Willitts, Joel. "Context Matters: Paul's Use of Leviticus 18:5 in Galatians 3:12." Tyndale
Bulletin 54, no. 2 (2003): 105-22.
239
Wilson, Todd A. "'under Law' in Galatians: A Pauline Theological Abbreviation."
Journal of Theological Studies 56, no. 2 (2005): 362-92.
Winstok, Zeev. "The Effect of Social and Situational Factors on the Intended Response to
Aggression among Adolescents." The Journal of Social Psychology 150, (2010):
57-76.
Young, Norman H. "The Figure of the Paidagogos in Art and Literature." Biblical
Archaeologist 53, no. 2 (1990): 80-86.
. "Paidagogos: The Social Setting of a Pauline Metaphor." Novum Testamentum
29, no. 2 (1987): 150-76.
Ysseldyk, Renate, Kimberly Matheson, and Hymie Anisman. "Religiosity as Identity:
Toward an Understanding of Religion from a Social Identity Perspective."
Personality and Social Psychology Review 14, no. 1 (2010): 60-71.

PHD - Galatians and Social Identity Theory PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PHD - Galatians and Social Identity Theory PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Galatians and Social Identity Theory

Claremont Graduate University

UMI Number: 3449362

All rights reserved

APPROVAL OF THE REVIEW COMMITTEE

Gentiles. Furthermore, it underscores how Gal 3:26-29 reflects a superordinate identity,

Chapter 1: Social Identity Theoretical Model

Origins and Development

Prototypes, Categorization, and Entitativity

Social Categorization and Depersonalization

Accessibility and Fit

Social Identity Motivations

The Influence of Groups

Chapter 2: Specific Features of Social Identity Theory

Depersonalized Social Attraction

Social Identity Theory of Leadership

Chapter 3: Social Identity and Modern Religion

Group Norms and Behavior

Chapter 4: Social Scientific Criticism

SITs Applicability to the New Testament

Social Scientific Criticism and SIT

Chapter 5: Historical and Social Context

The First Jewish-Roman War

The Bar Kokhba Revolt

The Overall Relationship with Rome

The Revolts in Light of the Social Identity Theory

Mixed Table Fellowship

The Incident at Antioch

The Situation in Galatia

Chapter 6 Rhetoric 122

Chapter 7: Prototypical Behavior

Pauls Final Position

Chapter 8: Prototypical Figures

Chapter 9: Superordinate Identities

Chapter 10: Prototypical Leaders

Leadership and Jewish Prototypes in Galatians

Leadership and Jewish Prototypes in Philippians

Leadership and the Christ Prototype in Galatia

Leadership and the Christ Prototype in Philippians

Leadership and the Christ Prototype in 2 Corinthians

Chapter 1: Social Identity Theoretical Model

Origins and Development

Hogg and Abrams, Social Identifications, XIII.

Hogg, "Social Identity Theory," 115.

Prototypes, Categorization, and Entitativity

Hogg, "Social Identity Theory," 117.

Hogg and Abrams, Social Identifications, 209.

Social Categorization and Depersonalization

Hogg, "Social Identity Theory," 118.

Hogg and Terry, Social Identity Processes, 5.

Hogg, "Social Identity Theory," 119.

Social Identity Motivations

Hogg and Terry, Social Identity Processes, 7.

The Influence of Groups

Chapter 2: Specific Features of Social Identity Theory

Michael A. Hogg, "Uncertainty-Identity Theory," in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed.

Hogg, "Uncertainty-Identity Theory," 73.

Hogg, "Uncertainty-Identity Theory," 81.

Depersonalized Social Attraction

Social Identity Theory of Leadership

Chapter 3: Social Identity and Modern Religion

Hogg and Terry, Social Identity Processes.