Peace and Mercy
A Critical Note on Galatians 6,16
Jan LAMBRECHT
KULeuven
In the recent editions of Novum Testamentum by Kurt-Aland
the
Greek
text
of
Galatians
6,16
reads:



 A comma is put after the verb 



VERSE 16 IN THE INTERPRETATION OF D.J. MOO


In his 2013 commentary Galatians, Douglas J. Moo quite
extensively deals with Gal 6,16 on pp. 398-403, in dialogue
with the recent publications1. He uses the NIV translation:
Douglas J. MOO, Galatians (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New
Testament), Grand Rapids, 2013. The references will not be repeated, except
for A. SHERWOOD, Paul and the Restoration of Humanity in Light of Ancient
Jewish Traditions (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity, 82), LeidenBoston, 2013, esp. pp. 221-2331 and the defenders of partly the same thesis
in this note by Suzan EASTMAN, "Israel and the Mercy of God: A Re-Reading
1
2
"And peace and mercy be upon as many as stay in step with his
rule - even to the Israel of God". As most scholars do, the
verse is taken as a wish, a "blessing": "be" commands the
whole
sentence.
One
further
notices
that
in
this
version
"peace and mercy" are joined, that "stay in step" is in the
present (Moo prefers the reading of the indicative future, not
the variant in the present nor that in the subjunctive aorist;
yet the future is considered to be "gnomic") and that the last
is rendered adverbially by "even".
Moo explains the three syntactical options with regard to
the second . (1)  is epexegetic (as in the NIV
translation above). (2)  is conjunctive. The expression
"the
Israel
of
God"
then
is
either
a
different
or
an
overlapping group in regard to "all who follow this rule". (3)
 is adverbial: "May peace come to all who follow this
standard, and mercy 'also' to the Israel of God".
The main question, however, is: Who does Paul mean by "the
Israel of God"? What is the referent of this expression? Moo
examines three matters: a) the syntax of the sentence, b) the
referent of "Israel" elsewhere in Paul and the NT, and c) the
context
of
unusual.
Galatians.
The
sentence
a)
The
begins
order
of
with
a
(
which
is
taken
up
by
words
in
"hanging
v.
16
is
nominative"
)
.
"Peace"
and
"mercy" are separated. Could, therefore, the second 
perhaps be epexegetic and the expression "the Israel of God"
refer, not to the ethnic Israel, but to all the believers, a
new Israel which at the end of v. 15 is indicated by "a new
creation"? b) Moo recognizes that "Israel" normally refers to
ethnic Israel. Yet in Rom 9,6 Paul states that "not all who
are descended from Israel are Israel," and in 1 Cor 10,18 he
refers to "Israel according to the flesh". These two uses seem
of Galatians 6,16 and Romans 9-11", in NTS 56 (2010) 567-395,
Christiane
ZIMMERMANN,
Gott
und
seine
Söhne.
Das
Gottesbild
Galatenbriefs (WMANT, 135), Neukirchen-Vluyn, 2013, pp. 133-141.
and
des
3
to imply that for Paul the term "Israel" can be employed in a
more theological sense and may then refer to a more spiritual
Israel, an Israel according to the Spirit, "a people that
extends
majority
beyond
of
any
ethnic
scholars
boundaries"
think
that
(p.
"Israel
of
403).
c)
The
God"
must
be
coextensive with "all who follow this rule" and thus include
Gentile
stresses
as
well
the
as
fact
Jewish
that
believers.
Gentiles
too
In
are
Galatians
heirs
of
Paul
Abraham
through Christ (3,29), children of the promise (4,28) and sons
of
God
(3,26;
4,5-7).
It
is,
these
scholars
claim,
inconceivable that at the end of the letter Paul would refer
to
the
Jews
as
the
"Israel
of
God"
as
distinct
from
the
decisive
for
Christian believers.
According
to
Moo
this
last
point
(c)
is
choosing the interpretation according to which "the Israel of
God", an expression which is a hapax in the NT, is considered
as referring to God's new people, Jewish as well as Gentile
believers. The second  is thus epexegetic2.
EVALUTION AND A NEW PROPOSAL
In our evaluation three questions must be asked. (1) Is v.
16a a blessing? (2) What about the two 's in v. 16b? (3)
Who is the most probable referent of "the Israel of God"?
1. Not a blessing in v. 16a
SHERWOOD, Paul and the Restoration of Humanity, p. 229, claims that what
Paul writes in 6,16 "culminates a very instance of Israel-nations
unification, as the  audience are definitely and christocentrically
re-identified as ". Cf. p. 230: "the bold
appropriation of the title Israel for the Galatian believers" and p. 231:
"the 'Israelification' of the . German scholars speak of a
semantische Neubestimmung or a Neudefinition.
2
4
The division of v.16 is most probably twofold3:
a


b


The
hanging
nominative


is
certainly conditional4. In "all those who will walk by this
rule"
the condition is expressed for
receiving
peace. So
maybe the first half of verse 16 is not a blessing. Paul may
have intended to say: upon all those who will walk by this
rule there will be peace, that is, on the condition that they
will do it. The protasis thus contains an injunction. The main
verb, which has to be mentally supplied in the apodosis, is
not a wish form ("be") but a future which contains the promise
for
all
standard
those
is
circumcision
who
live
indicated
nor
according
in
the
to
preceding
uncircumcision
counts
the
standard.
verse
for
15:
That
neither
anything,
but
rather what matters is to be "a new creation". We reject the
assumption that peace and mercy in v. 16 constitute a single
blessing5.
It should also be mentioned that the concluding
wish-prayer, the final benediction, is to be found in 6,18:
"The
grace
of
our
Lord
Jesus
Christ
be
with
your
spirit,
brothers"6, followed by "Amen". "Thus at the end of this letter
in which he has declared the obsolescence of the way of the
Cf. EASTMANN, "Israel and the Mercy of God", pp. 272-273. V. 16b is an
independent clause. Yet Eastman considers the whole of v. 16 as a
benediction.
4 Cf. SHERWOOD, Paul and the Restoration of Humanity, p. 227: the only
conditional benediction in the Pauline documents" which, moreover, "carries
the force of an injunction".
5 Contra EASTMAN, "Israel and the Mercy of God", p. 376, and ZIMMERMANN,
Gott und seine Söhne, pp. 133-141.
6
This is the only final greeting where Paul calls the audience

3
5
law that his fellow Jews still follow, Paul prays for God's
mercy on Israel"7.
2 An Adverbial  in v. 16b
In v. 16b Paul begins anew. He no longer speaks of peace
but of mercy. He no longer indicates a condition (following
this rule), but he just mentions mercy. Therefore, the main
verb hidden in v. 16b is no longer an indicative future of
promise ("there will be") but most probably a prayer-wish:
"may
God's
mercy
come
upon...".
The
following

is
therefore most likely adverbial: may God's mercy also come
upon the Israel of God! It is thus quite possible that only v.
16a
is
a
conditional
straightforward
prayer.
indicates
he
that
period
By
while
means
implicitly
v.
of
implores
16b
"also",
the
constitutes
Paul
divine
a
moreover
mercy
on
"those who follow this standard", that is: on his Christian
audience as well.
3. The Israel of God8
It
would
seem
that
after
 at the end of v. 16a the
identity
of
those
contained
in

 (v. 16b) must be different. Moreover, God's mercy
is not the same as God's peace and the conditional promise
that there will be peace in 16a is different from the prayer
"may
there
be
mercy"
in
16b.
That
the
hapax
expression
, a "neologism", is created by
Paul with regard to ethnic Israel may be surprising but must
not be considered as impossible.
It is true,
in Galatians
EASTMANN, "Israel and the Mercy of God", p. 389.
Cf. EASTMANN, "Israel and the Mercy of God", pp. 385-390, and ZIMMERMANN,
Gott und seine Söhne, pp. 133-141.
7
8
6
Israel
is
referred

to
by

(2,7.8.9)
and
(1,14),

(2,13.14.15 and 3,28) but Paul's anger towards the Jewish
Christians who compel the Gentiles to live like Jews must not
have destroyed his true love of his own people. What he writes
in Romans 9-11 will prove this explicitly. All this taken
together "the Israel of God" in v. 16b most likely refers to
unbelieving ethnic Israel.
CONCLUSION
We cannot be completely certain as to the syntax of Gal
6,16 cannot be obtained. The same applies to the referent of
the
expression
"the
Israel
of
God".
Yet
my
proposal
of
interpretation differs from that of Douglas J. Moo and the
majority of commentators.
In
this
brief
note
major
attention
is
given
to
the
difference of meaning of peace and mercy. Moreover, these two
different terms are not only separated, they also belong to
two different sentences, the first a conditional promise, the
second
should
a
be
simple
put
.
straightforward
after
In
v.
prayer.
Hence,
,
16a
the
verb
the
comma
not
after

is
better considered as a real future just as the implied main
verb of that sentence most probably is a future.
In v. 16b Paul's attention suddenly seems to go to his own
people, chosen by God, "the Israel of God". He prays for mercy
upon ethnic Israel. His prayer for the Christian believers
will come very soon, at the very end of the letter, in v. 18.
Yet in this verse neither God's peace nor God's mercy are
7
spoken
of
any
longer,
but
"the
grace
of
our
Lord
Jesus
Christ".
It should be noted that the so different vv. 16a and 16b
both
somewhat
strangely
end
on
an

+
accusative
construction. Further, the second  in v. 16b is not
conjunctive but adverbial: And may God's mercy also be upon
the
Israel

of
God.
and
But,
above
the
all,
the
referent
recipients
of
of

 are not to be identified as one
and the same.