EBONYI STATE UNIVERSITY

DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION

FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HUMANITIES

PROGRAMME: DOCTORATE DEGREE IN NEW TESTAMENT

COURSE CODE: REL 971

COURSE TITLE: SEMINAR 1

TOPIC:

FREEDOM FOR AND FREEDOM FROM: A THEOLOGICAL OUTLOOK OF

GALATIANS 5:13-15

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE: REL 971

BY

UKADIKE ANAYOCHUKWU COSMAS

REG. NO: EBSU/PG/PHD/2021/11202

PROFESSOR:

REV. FR. PROF. C.I. OSUNWOKEH

 FREEDOM FOR AND FREEDOM FROM: A THEOLOGICAL OUTLOOK OF
GALATIANS 5:13-15

Abstract

Freedom is a very topical issue of discussion especially as it pertains to our daily human quest
for liberty and the desire for right conduct. Today, the understanding of freedom has become so
varied and quite misleading that majority of people, especially our youths now tend to settle with
the wrong notion and orientation of what freedom is not. This has led to the present social evils
that our youths have chosen to indulge themselves in, some of which includes; the quest to make
fast money, cultic ritual involvements, kidnappings, just to mention a few.
But just like the French philosopher says; ‘man is free but everywhere in chains’ (Jean Jacques
Rousseau).
This freedom would be looked at from the point of view of Galatians 5:13-15 which says:
“13. For you were called to freedom, brothers and sisters. Only do not use your freedom as an
opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. 14. For the whole law is fulfilled in
one word: “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.” 15. But if you bite and devour one
another, watch out that you are not consumed by one another.”
This research work shall implore the use of the literal, moral and allegorical methods of biblical
hermeneutics in interpreting Paul’s concept of freedom. Taking into cognizance the great
distinction that lies between the two meanings of freedom viz: freedom for and freedom from.
This will further highlight the key areas for a clearer understanding of what each stands for, and
when they can be applied in our day to day living.
This research work will make a number of recommendations which shall bother on responsible
use of freedom and will show that freedom from the law does not by any means do away with
the obligations of right moral conduct. This is because the obligations of moral conduct are
fostered not by the dictates of the law, but by the operations of the free mind.
Table of contents

Introduction

Background of the study

Motivation

Definition of terms

Literature review

Freedom for and Freedom from: a Theological outlook of Galatians 5:13-15

Evaluation/Conclusion

References
 13 For you were called to freedom, brethren; 13 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπ’ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε,

only do not turn your freedom into an ἀδελφοί· μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς

opportunity for the flesh, but through love ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί, ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης

serve one another. 14 For the whole Law is δουλεύετε ἀλλήλοις.

fulfilled in one word, in the statement, “YOU

14 ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ πεπλήρωται,
SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS
ἐν τῷ Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν
YOURSELF.” 15 But if you bite and devour
15 εἰ δὲ ἀλλήλους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε,
one another, take care that you are not
βλέπετε μὴ ὑπ’ ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε.
consumed by one another.

Introduction

Background of the Study

Freedom is an important motif in several of Paul’s extant letters. This is true especially of

his letters to Christians in Galatia and Rome. In his allegory of Abrahamic offspring in Galatians

4, for instance, Paul likens Christians to offspring of the “free woman” (Sarah) instead of the

“slave woman” (Hagar), concluding the allegory with the claim, “It is for freedom that Christ has

set us free” (5:1). The sentence might look somewhat awkward, verging on tautology or

redundancy. But Paul has constructed it in this way for a particular purpose, as we will see in this

write up.
Paul is by far the most vocal advocate of freedom in the entire Bible. It is quite characteristic that

almost all usages of the term ἐλευθερία and its cognates (ἐλευθερίoς, ἐλευθερίoυν) in the N.T.

occur in the authentic proto-Pauline epistles (26 all together and only few outside them).

“Freedom” is more probably being employed in accordance with the classical Aristotelian

standard definition as “freedom to do what one likes.” This meaning fits Gal 5:13 (“do not let

freedom be an excuse to the flesh”), where a clearly ecclesiological nuance is added (“let love

make you serve one another”), for in this passage the condition of slavery is described as not

being able to do what one wishes (Gal 5:17).

Furthermore, St. Paul the Apostle is the first and greatest Christian theologian. He is the

only one who clearly speaks to us from the first generation of Christianity with his own voice

and the first Christian we know of who wrestled at length and to good effect with a variety of

theological and ethical issues. One such issue is of course the concept of freedom, and one can

justifiably call him “the Apostle of Freedom”, taking into account that phrases like “For freedom

Christ has set us free” (Gal 5:1),“the freedom we have in Christ Jesus” (Gal 2:4), or “the creation

itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the

children of God” (Rom 8:21), all come from his undisputed and by all means authentic letters.

These statements and his letters in general quickly came to be recognized as of continuing

authority for the Church up to the present era. And as part of the NT canon they have served to

define Christian theology as no other set of documents has. This last point remains true, even

when later writers (e.g. the Fathers in the Golden age) have been more determinative, since they

all acknowledged the prior authority of Paul. Peter Edmond (2016) holds that St. Paul’s letters,

contain the first elaboration, though a sketchy one, of an understanding of Christian faith as

freedom.
 Nevertheless, St. Paul’s conception of freedom has for generations been discussed within

framework of, and for some in opposition to, the Jewish Law; consequently freedom is normally

conceived of in relation to sin and death: in other words freedom is almost exclusively

understood as freedom from the law, freedom from sin, and freedom from death. The analysis of

the subject in the well-known TDNT by H. Schlier1 is largely responsible for this tendency, at

least in recent biblical scholarship. Based on a very surfaced and not a thorough examination of

some NT it was suggested that in the early Christian tradition a holistic understanding of

freedom (i.e. including liberation) was not decisive for salvation.

The obvious question, therefore, of all unbiased students of the Bible, who are

accustomed with the undisputed connection in the O.T. between freedom and liberation, is how a

Jew, admittedly follower of his own traditions, could have completely despised the Jewish Law,

and in addition internalize the basic story of the Shema. More and more biblical theologians

nowadays realize that the above mentioned threefold schema is based not on a thorough

examination of the proto-Pauline relevant passages, but on the assumption that law, sin, and

death, being undoubtedly central entities in St. Paul’s thought, must have naturally influenced

also his understanding of freedom. This conventional treatment of the Pauline theology,

evidenced more clearly in the post Reformation era, was the result of the antithesis between Law

and Gospel, which had been for centuries the effective key for Christian theology at large. For

some scholars like W. Mc Fadden (2021), this antithesis was a result of Paul’s doctrine of

justification by faith (Gospel) defined in opposition to justification by the works of the Jewish

Law. Inevitably the antithesis between Christianity (Gospel) and Judaism (Law) came into the

fore. Recent biblical scholarship, however, has convincingly demonstrated that the old (mostly,

but by no means exclusively) Protestant view owed more to the Reformation polemics than to a
critical study of the Judaism and its canonical and extracanonical texts. Many scholars nowadays

underline the real character of Judaism in the early Christian period, and St. Paul’s more positive

statements about the law. In brief, St. Paul's Gospel was for all, Jews and Gentiles alike.

Freedom on a general scope

And what does ‘freedom’ mean on the worldwide stage? A couple of years ago we were

all excited about the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. We watched countries in North Africa get rid of

heavy-handed dictators and work towards a more open future. Many people in the west assumed,

as we have done elsewhere, that all you have to do is to get rid of tyrants and then freedom will

break out. That is the narrative we know. It is, especially, the narrative that is very familiar in

Nigeria; but is it a one-size-fits-all? We thought Syria would be next, but now it emerges that

some of the rebels are in fact part of Al-Qaeda; and among our closest allies in the region are

some of the most oppressive tyrannies. We cheered when the Berlin Wall came down quarter of

a century ago, but the ‘freedom’ which has followed it has (to put it mildly) not been

straightforward. So too with post-colonial Africa. As people sometimes say, you can’t eat

freedom. What should we think when we help people gain the freedom to vote and then the great

majority vote for something that looks to us like a new form of tyranny or even slavery? What

should a Christian think about that? Freedom is much more complex than it looks.

Before analyzing freedom, however, we must briefly refer to the Old Testament and the

Hellenistic background.

1. The Old Testament Background

In the O.T. freedom is almost exclusively understood in its social dimension, i.e. in

opposition to slavery. The Hebrew terms ‫ׁש פֻח‬

ְ ‫ ) ָה‬hupša) for “freedom” often occur in discussions
of slavery and manumission. In these texts, hopšı (free) is mainly used to designate someone

merely freed from slavery. Though according to L. Tverberg (2015) the redemption of Israel

from slavery in Egypt is cited within the institution of Jubilee in support of the manumission of

all Hebrew slaves every 7th year (Deut 15:15), the O.T. does not develop a theology of freedom

on the basis of the Exodus. In the book of Leviticus Israel was ransomed in order to be God’s

servants (Lev 25:42; cf. Deut 6:20–25). In sum, the language used to describe this event is

primarily that of “redemption”, not of “freedom.” Only in the description of Jubilee, the year of

“freedom”, are we encountered with a real conception of freedom (Lev 25:10). This idea was

theologically developed in Trito-Isaiah (Is 61:1), the passage on which Jesus of Nazareth has

based his programmatic proclamation (Lk 4:16ff).

2. The Greek, Hellenism and Roman Background

In contrast to the O.T. Semitic tradition the Greek term ἐλευθερία is first connected with the

Greek resistance to the Persian Empire. Herodotus e.g. understood the Persian War as a defense

of freedom and law against despotism. ἐλευθερία and libertas (Latin “freedom”) were later

developed in the Greek and Roman world. One standard definition of “freedom”, at the latest

since the time of Aristotle, was “doing whatever one wants” (k 佼 ὅ,k す 決ち く ο へそ ikα か k

すな πο す iῖ ち, repeated by in Latin by Cicero. Greeks and Romans were of course aware that

such a definition might lead to conflicts with the law.

Stoic philosophers resolved the debate by asserting that since the law (of nature) is good and

since no one desires to do what is bad, the only person who is truly free and does what he/she

wants is the one who does what is good and thus follows the law. Nevertheless, even this

clarification did not put an end to the discussions and later the Cynics advanced the theory that
the true law can be recognized only by the rugged individual in a struggle against vulgar

opinions (including laws established merely by humans). This theory coincided with the rise of

the oecumene, in place of the polis (city), as the framework for human life. As a consequence a

notion of an “internal”, “individualized” freedom started to be established in the Hellenistic age.

It is important at this stage to mention that in Greek classical antiquity a connection between

freedom and God is clearly established, and the term ἐλευθερίoς (Gk “liberating”) became a

particularly popular epithet of the gods.

Paul’s theological concept of Freedom

Paul’s theology of freedom seeks to explain how the concept of freedom, especially

freedom from the law can be translated beyond mere rhetoric’s, to a living reality which is felt in

our day to day living. Thus, reflecting on freedom without taking into cognizance the human

‘daily living, would have to be a theology of irresponsibility’.

Joseph, (2019) affirms that “freedom to,” which is the opposite of “freedom from, remains

“freedom with” responsibility. For he avows that “freedom without the ability to accept the

responsibilities of one’s action is an act of irresponsibility”.

With this expressions therefore, it becomes clearer that ‘freedom to’ is that freedom that

goes with responsibility. Thus, ‘freedom to’ equals ‘freedom with’, while ‘freedom from equals

‘freedom without’.

With the expression, “you were called to freedom…” Paul turns to the practical way of love. He

repeats the key concepts- freedom (vs. 1) and brethren (vs 11). Joseph, (2019) affirms that, the

Galatians are called ‘to freedom’, for a purpose, ‘to be free (5:1),’ which is the opposite of

‘freedom from’ fear (cf. rom 8.15) and timidity (2 Tim 1:7) the Thessalonians are called ‘to be
holy’ (1 Thess 4:7), and the author of the first letter of Peter says ‘he who called you is holy, so

be holy in all you do’ (1 Peter 1:15). According to Joseph, (2019) the preposition ‘for’, expresses

the purpose of the call: this purpose is so necessary here, so as to drive home the true meaning of

freedom as taught By Paul. The preposition also helps to forestall a miss use of freedom. cf.

Bruce, (2002).

Freedom is a Christian value. But what does it mean? Am I free in Christ to do whatever comes

into my head? Surely not. And if I embrace the vision of holiness as I ought, am I really free to

be holy? What happens when I find the powerful lure of sin creeping up on me once more? Am I

free to resist? If I am, is it because the Holy Spirit is enabling me to do the right thing.

Paul adds fuel to the paradoxical fire. At the very moment he urges us to freedom, he

declares that we are to fulfil the Law! The whole Law, as Jesus had said, is summed up in one

command: Love your neighbour as yourself. Now Paul has spent the previous three chapters of

Galatians saying that as a Christian you are not subject to the Law of Moses. He is urging his ex-

pagan converts that they do not have to become physically Jewish, do not have to submit to

circumcision, to belong to the Messiah’s people. No, he says: the Law of Moses was given for a

specific purpose and a specific time, and now that the Messiah has come the original promise to

Abraham has been fulfilled, with people from every family on earth welcome to belong to God’s

people on the basis of faith alone. In fact, he sees the Law of Moses as itself an enslaving power,

because it shut the Gentiles out of God’s people and it shut the Jews up in the prison-house of

their own sin. The Law was incapable of fulfilling God’s promises of freedom and life. This is

what has made generations of Christians imagine that Christian freedom is somehow the polar

opposite of law. And that has colluded with post-Enlightenment philosophy, to generate today’s

confusions.
 ‘Freedom’ is one of those big words, like ‘justice’ or ‘beauty’, which everyone affirms

but scarcely understands. We all say Yes to it in principle, but find it difficult or impossible in

practice – personally, societally, politically, and theologically. We are born for freedom. We

grasp at it, knowing it to be our destiny, and yet it eludes our grasp because we want the wrong

sort of freedom for the wrong sort of purpose. We are, to that extent, like Moses killing the

Egyptian; we want the quick and easy solution. He had to learn patience, and so do we.

Gordon (2019) insisted that freedom for Paul is the experience of being liberated or

released from our dominating ego-centrism. It removes all the obstacles that keep us from being

the people God created us to be, from living the life that God calls us to live. According to

Gordon, that life embraces two important tasks:

- To recognize, develop, and use our God-given gifts, talents, and skills for God’s glory

and for service to others, and

- To give ourselves in love to others and to receive their love and service in return

without impediment.

Free from Self -interestedness

Accounting fully for Paul’s theology of “freedom from” requires an examination of the

middle chapters of Romans. We have already noted instances when Paul articulates the view that

others have attributed to him—that is, it might actually be a good thing for Christians to be free

to commit sins, since that would only enhance divine grace (Romans 6:1, 15). On each occasion,

Paul immediately rejects this view with a most vociferous ejection, “that must not be the case!”

This stance might seem obvious, but for Paul it was more than just a matter of ethical common
sense. It involved cognizance of an apocalyptic scenario that the Romans were in danger of

losing sight of (like many Christians after them). That apocalyptic scenario Freedom needs to be

clearly in mind when considering Paul’s emphasis on freedom, as outlined in the following

paragraphs. Front and center in this regard stand the “powers” that give shape to human

existence. In Romans 5:12-21, Paul outlines two separate spheres of influence in which different

“cosmic powers” are operative.

Highlighting Paul’s notion of sin makes the point well. Paul did not simply imagine

Adam’s act of sin to be the first in a never-ending line of sins replicated by his offspring; instead,

and much more dramatically, Adam’s sin provided the occasion for suprahuman powers to gain a

devastating foothold within God’s good creation. Paul introduced one of these powers already in

Romans 3:9, the power of Sin, and in Romans 5:12-21 he associates that power with another, the

power of Death. At times in Romans 5:12-21 Paul seems to have human sinfulness and human

death in view, while at others he seems to have the cosmic powers in view—not least when

speaking of them as “reigning” or being the overlords of the sphere of influence in which sin and

death are human inevitabilities (5:14, 17, 21). In Paul’s view, the cosmic dimension and the

personal dimension are intertwined parts of the same fundamental problem. The death and

resurrection of Jesus introduces a situation of “freedom” not only in relation to the human

inevitabilities of sin and death but also in relation to the cosmic powers of Sin and Death. In

Romans 6, Paul spells out the mechanisms whereby this “freedom from the suprahuman powers”

is brought about. Central to his thinking is baptism. Christians have been baptized into Christ

Jesus and have been united with him in death, and in this way, the power of Sin is hoodwinked,

since it gets no inevitable traction in the lives of Jesus-followers.

 Death is the key here. When people die, the power of Sin no longer has a foothold in their

lives; since Jesus-followers have died with Christ, the power of Sin has thereby been duped. But

these “died with Christ” people are not trophies for the power of Death. Instead, they have come

alive in a new “sphere of lordship,” a sphere in which their lives are instruments of God’s grace

and righteousness. For Paul, the power of Sin is no longer the controlling overlord of those who

follow Jesus, and those who follow Jesus are no longer “slaves” to the power of Sin. So he

writes: “do not let [the power of] Sin reign [or be the lord] in your mortal bodies…for [the power

of] Sin shall no longer be your master [or overlord]” (6:12, 14, TNIV). Having been “slaves to

sin” (6:20), Christians are now “set free from the power of Sin” (6:7, 18, 20, 22). This does not

mean, of course, that they are therefore free to commit sins. Paul recognizes that it is still

possible for Christians to “offer” their bodies to the power of Sin, allowing that suprahuman

power to influence their lives. But he sees this as a perversion of Christian freedom. Christians

are, instead, exhorted to offer themselves to the power of God.

Paul’s conviction of “freedom from the Torah” plays a part within this larger context of

Paul’s “apocalyptic” thought about the suprahuman powers that oppress God’s world. In Romans

7:1-6, Paul observes that dead persons (like those who have died with Christ) are not bound to

laws that bind others, and he draws from this the view that there is no salvific necessity to

observing the Mosaic law. In fact, Romans 7:7-25 outlines how the power of Sin hijacks the

God-given law so that the law itself serves the purposes of Sin. This allows Paul to designate the

Mosaic law as “the law of sin and death” (Romans 8:2, TNIV), perhaps connoting the Mosaic

law engulfed within the program of the powers of Sin and Death. In the view of Gaston (2006), it

is this law in its inadvertent association with powers of Sin and Death that Paul says Christians

have been “set free” from. Having been set free in one sense, Christians have become “enslaved”
in another sense, becoming “slaves to righteousness” (Romans 6:18; cf. 6:20, 22 TNIV). And

this notion of Christian enslavement introduces the second dimension of what it is that Christians

have been freed from; Sin.

What the power of Sin induced in the person who speaks in Romans 7 is covetousness.

Whereas the law commands “You shall not covet,” the power of Sin seized “the opportunity

afforded by the commandment” and “produced in me every kind of coveting” (Romans 7:7-8,

TNIV). If we can uncover what “every kind of coveting” looks like to Paul, we can unmask what

it is that the power of Sin promotes within enslaved humanity. Ditzel asserts that; Paul is

addressing the argument that people sometimes have against grace alone that, “if we don’t hold

ourselves in check with the law, we will sin. In verse 15, he’s simply stating the question that

others challenge him with: If we’re under grace and not under the law, won’t we sin? And his

answer is, No. If we are under the law, we serve sin. If we are under grace, we serve

righteousness. This is because, being freed from sin, we become bondservants of righteousness

and serve from the heart”. This is not theoretical or something only for the future. Freedom from

sin is a present reality for the believer. We are not sinners because we are not under the law, and,

“Sin is not charged when there is no law” (Rom 5:13b).

Conclusion

It is pertinent to understand that Paul uses the notion of freedom as a kind of short-hand

for the conviction that gentile Christians need not “enslave” themselves to observing the Torah.

When some proposed to the Galatians that gentile Christians should be circumcised, Paul

understood this to be a way of undermining “the freedom we have in Christ Jesus” and a way of
“making us slaves” (Galatians 2:4). So too, Paul’s claim that “It is for freedom that Christ has set

us free” is followed by the exhortation to “stand firm” against those who inspire gentile

Christians to be circumcised, lest the Galatians “be burdened… by a yoke of slavery” (5:1). For

Paul, then, Christian “freedom” must go with responsibility; respecting the law, without being

enslaved by it.
References

Bruce, F.F. (2002). The Epistle to the Galatians. A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New

International Greek Testament Commentary, Paternoster Press, Grand Rapid.

Dunn, D. G. J. (1993). The Epistle to the Galatians. Black’s New Testament Commentary, Baker

Academic, Grand Rapids.

Orji, J.M. (2019) “Christ or Ritual Circumcision, The Hermeneutics of Gal 5:2-6”, Sovereign

Prints Nig. Ltd., Lagos, Nigeria.

Petros Vassiliadis, (2017), Saint Paul: Apostle of freedom in Christ, Department of Theology of

Aristotle, University of Thessaloniki, ICOANA CREDINTEI, Vol. 3 No. 6.

Marian Ji Ra (2019). "Paul's Discourse on Slavery and freedom in the light of Stoic Philosophy",

an unpublished thesis presented to the Department of Religion and Christian Theology,

Stockholm School of Theology.

Natalia Regoli (2019). "Galatians 5:1 Meaning of It is for freedom that Christ has set us free",

Connecus https:connectusfund.org/galatians-5-1-meaning-of-it-is-for-freedom-that-christ-has-

set-us-free

Kori Yates (2018). "Freedom comes with Responsibility", Planting Roots Journal of Faith and

Religion Vol. 4. No. 1:2-5

Philip J. Long (2019). "Galatians 5:13-16- Freedom in Christ", Galatians, Pauline Literature,

Freedom in Christ, Galatians, Pauline Theology, https://reading acts.com/2019/09/28/freedom-

in-christ-galatians-513-16/

Biblehub.com Galatians 5:13 https://biblehub.com/Galatians/5-13.htm

Marin Bugiulescu (2018). " Freedom, A Gift of the God and Responsibility of the Human Being"

International Academic and Scientific Association, Vol. No. 2:116-123.

Daniel Lewis (2020). "Freedom: Our Responsibility- Galatians 5:13-14",

https://www.richlandnaz.org/daily-devotions/2020/7/3/freedom-our-responsibility-galatians-

513--14-july-14

L. Tverberg (2015). Enslaving Themselves - Accessed from En-Gedi Resource Center

https://enter I resource center.com/2015/07/09/enslaving items ever/

W. Mc Fadden (2021). "10 Things You Should Know about Justification by Faith", Accessed

from https://www.crossway.org/articles/10-things-you-should-know-about-justification-by-faith/

P. Edward (2016). “Paul to the Galatians: Our freedom in Christ”, Thinking faith, center for

Vocation and Mission research, Jesuit community, Stamford Hill, north London.

Gordon Lindsey (2019). “What the apostle Paul means by Freedom”, The bible in my Blood

World press, Accessed from; https://thebibleisinmyblood.wordpress.com/2019/09/08/what-the-

apostle-paul-means-by-freedom/

L. Gaston (2006), Paul and the Torah, Wipf and Stock; Reprint edition, amazon book clubs,

www.amazon.com
P. Ditzel (2021). “Did Paul Teach That Believers Still Sin”, Paul’s Teaching on sin,

wordofhisgrace.org 1197 Polk Road 23Cove, AR 71937.