INTRODUCTION

Our text today includes part of Paul's description of his life, which intends to demonstrate his faithfulness to the one true gospel that Jesus personally gave him and which he was called on to preach.  Jesus Christ is the source and the subject of the gospel and since he will judge all his servants by the standards of this gospel, no servant of his should seek human approval as a support for his work and actions.

Paul demonstrates that everything he did was to ensure that believers stood for the truth of the gospel.  He demonstrated its rock solid position by showing how he defended the gospel at the Jerusalem meeting:

-how he refused the pressure to circumcise his Gentile companion worker Titus, since this act was not necessary or called for,

-how though he had been called by Jesus and taught differently from the other Apostles, always working independently, he readily accepted the right hand of fellowship and the full support and agreement from the leaders in Jerusalem.

-how he had resisted the attempts by his opponents, which he called ‘false brethren’, who spied on him and his fellow workers in order to attack their liberty in Christ.

-how we resisted the Apostle Peter's and Barnabas separating themselves from table fellowship with Gentiles, when Jews from Jerusalem who did not agree with that kind of behavior, came to visit them in Antioch.

Paul emphasized his faithfulness to the one true gospel, because the happenings in the Galatian churches amounted to a fundamental departure from this one true gospel.  This development was nothing short of disastrous, and prompted the Apostle Paul to mount a vigorous defence of his apostleship and the Gospel that he preached. Paul described the groups (see lesson 9) which had been making the rounds and attacking him and his doctrines, as preaching ‘another gospel’.

INTERPRETING PAUL

The traditional teaching on Galatians have often been used to misrepresent what many Seventy Day Baptist consider to be the truth of the gospel. As a result of this misrepresentation, many have been able to use Galatians to reject the truth taught by the primitive Jewish Church; giving support to emphases that have distorted the gospel and introducing unnecessary conflict between law and grace. They have denigrated Judaism by elevating the false traditions which entered Judaism as the true Judaism. Consequently we hold that Paul did not disagree with the other Apostles and all of them were firmly anchored in true Judaism, rejecting the false elements as well as paganism.

As a result, Paul stood firmly for the gospel without apology. It is important  that we understand that much of the mainstream interpretation of Galatians and Paul’s writings are now being modified  and rejected. Modern scholarship is now moving closer to what some consider a true interpretation of Galatians and Paul’s position.

Many commentators have labelled these false teachers Judaizers but as to their makeup the Scriptures are not very clear. After noting that there is some evidence in Paul’s letters, that there were some Jewish Christians who believed that Gentile Christians had to conform to the requirements of Jewish law or practice, before they would be regarded as members of the people of God, one writer notes that the idea that Paul's opponents in Corinth were emissaries of Peter and those who came to Antioch were emissaries of James, has led to Paul being seen: “as an isolated Apostle who alone truly understood the universalism and freedom that Jesus represented.  Apparently in the memory of the other leading Apostles faith had either been forgotten, misunderstood or compromised… from this prospective Paul was seen as a lone contender for the universalism of the gospel in contrast to the primitive church, whose leaders were in varying degrees tribalistic or particularistic in their ongoing commitment to Judaism.”

He then continues to show the tremendous distortion and error in this position, and this has forced our redefinition of the term “Judaizer”, which has been used to put Jewish Christians who practiced any element found in Judaism in a bad light.  This of course has led Gentile theologians and believers to reject anything Jewish as being in opposition to Christianity.  This of course has always been an error laden position, and it has plagued the church, and has allowed many in the church to perpetuate their carnal prejudices and adopt positions which are totally unscriptural.  He continues:

“ More recent research has uncovered more diversity in New Testament groups and theologies.  The emphasis upon the particularity of each letter, addressed to a specific situation, has…. revealed that Paul's enemies are not necessarily all of Jewish background nor should be regarded them as a coherent, organized opposition.  Partisanship need not always take the form of an organized party.”

Most modern commentators have modified and to some extent refuted and rejected the old position that Paul's opponents are part of a single movement and that they are connected with the Jerusalem church.  Paul thought highly of Jerusalem and always called the Jerusalem Christians “saints”, the leaders as “Apostles”, “brothers in the Lord” and even some of them as “pillars”.

It is just too simplistic to ignore that there will be different emphases among different believers as well as some diversity of opinion on several points, with some being closer to Paul on particular issues rather than on others.  In this diversity there would be some ideas that would be bordering on heresies, and their proponents would attack not only Paul, but Peter, John, and other Apostles. Some, both Jews and Gentile, would certainly deny the faith, and cause problems for the church.

Among other errors, some of these people taught that along with belief in Christ, it was necessary for believers to maintain or adopt certain facets of Judaism, particularly circumcision, so as to be acceptable to God.

These insidious teachings would have believers salvation tied to their works, and these ideas had taken root in the Galatian churches, a development Paul viewed with the utmost gravity. Interestingly this teaching and its authors were not confined to the churches of Galatia but also surfaced in Corinth and Antioch (Acts 15:1; 15:5-30).

The purveyors of this particular heresy about the necessity for Gentile circumcision, sought to undermine Paul and thereby his message, by attacking his integrity and credentials as an apostle. Paul felt obliged to defend the calling, style and authority of his apostleship (1-2), so he gave us its autobiography and he recalled his public rebuke of Peter, to demonstrate his defence of the gospel, show his autonomy of the other Apostles and refute the charge that he was a “men-pleaser”. This was a strong indication of his zeal for and commitment to the true gospel.

Peter had been guilty of what Paul called dissimulation  (hypocrisy) in his behaviour among some Gentile brethren in Antioch (2:11-14). Peter’s conduct implied Gentiles needed to live like Jews, something Paul considered a betrayal of the gospel. Paul was insistent that the gospel be consistently followed.

Our text then should be considered in the context of his censure of Peter, for the teaching that all are saved by faith is founded on the sufficiency of Jesus’ sacrifice for salvation and carries the same implications for Jews and Gentiles alike.

Note this incident is not to be taken as some disagreement in doctrine between Peter and Paul, because prior to its occurrence, Peter’s behaviour among the Gentiles underscored the teaching of the Gospel. It was rather an isolated slip on the part of that Apostle and Paul himself speaks of the unanimity between himself and the other apostles on doctrine.

In our text Paul reiterates the basic teaching that all are saved by the faith of Christ and refutes as absurd, some suggestions by his enemies that his abandonment of ‘righteousness by Law’, logically made Christ a minister of sin. Paul’s argu­ment is an appeal to the course that he and Peter had taken in receiving justification (vs.15-16). He exposes what would be obvious inconsistencies on the part of any believer, that would seek to align faith in Jesus with any practice, circumcision or otherwise, as a means of justification.  He chides the Galatians as ‘foolish’ and gullible, as he employs a series of pointed questions to expose the gross error of their deviation from the gospel and in effect their defection from Christ.

He further points out that he had died to the Law in Christ, and that he now lives in Christ and by Christ, his life being sustained by trust in the Son of God.  In fact, if one contends, he concludes that the Law is a means of justification, then the death of Christ is made useless and unnecessary.  How could a believer affirm that?

The first section of our text deals with Paul’s defence of his apostleship against the charges of his enemies while the latter section is a vindication of his gospel against the “different gospel” preached by the heretics. He will ultimately show that salvation and sanctification both are the result of faith, apart from law-keeping.

Paul will set forth the new life in Christ secured through His penal and substitutionary death on the cross and as experienced by the Galatians.  It is important to note however that Paul is not criticizing the law itself but rather its misuse. As we read our text therefore it is important to look at this comment by one writer:

“ This misuse of the Law is what Paul means by the term the “works of the Law”.

‘ Works of Law’, ‘ works of the Law’ are nowhere understood here, either by his Jewish interlocutors or by Paul himself, as works which earn God's favor, as merit-amassing observances.  They are rather seen as badges: they are simply what membership of the covenant people involve, what mark about the Jews as God's people;..  In other words, Paul has in view precisely what Sanders calls ‘covenantal nomism’.  And what he denies is that God's justification depends on “covenantal nomism’, that God's grace extends only to those who wear the badge of the covenant…

THE TEXT.

Verse 15-16.   In the preceding text Paul showed that he did not regard himself as inferior to the other apostles, they were not his mentors. He had consistently maintained the gospel message, even to the point of opposing Peter to his face on one occasion when Peter was manifestly in the wrong. Paul flatly rejected any idea that the observance of  Jewish rites was necessary to salvation and here begins to set forth his argument that all are saved by the faith of Christ, even as he had previously taught the Galatians.

We who are…Paul writes that although himself, Peter and other Jewish Christians enjoyed all the advantages and privileges of Jewish birth, they nevertheless found justification only by the faith of Christ. He is not suggesting that they do not sin but makes the distinction with the totally unrestrained and gross sensuality of the Gentiles who had not received God’s special revelation in His Law. The distinction notwithstanding, all Jew and Gentile alike are justified by the faith of Christ.

Paul’s emphasis on and repetition of: man is not justified by the works of the law, is intended to rule out any confusion on this point. The traditional Protestant view has been that “Works of the law” (legal works) describes the requirements of the Mosaic law (ceremonial). The meaning of this phrase is a widely debated one, and the Dictionary of Paul and his Letters identifies at least six views of what this phrase means. We can list them without discussions as:

One commentator notes: The object of Paul here seems to be to show, that as they had believed in the Lord Jesus, and thus had been justified, there was no necessity of obeying the law of Moses with any view to justification. The thing had been fully done without the deeds of the law, and it was now unreasonable and unnecessary to insist on the observance of the Mosaic rites.

This view however must be tempered with the understanding that not all Mosaic regulations are irrelevant for our day and many preceded the birth of Moses and the formation of even the nation of Israel.

Note also the meaning of the word, to justify. It does not mean to make righteous but to declare righteous. One writer notes: It is the declared purpose of God to regard and treat those sinners who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as if they had not sinned, on the ground of the merits of the Saviour.

Justification results from an action of God which places an individual in a right relationship with God, acquiting them, so that there are present as well as future implications for believers.  This action of God in no way means that God does not require certain kinds of behavior, but it certainly points believers to the fact that all behavior must then be in line with the righteousness of God.

Paul rejects this conclusion with an emphatic God forbid! Further some surmise that it could be said the gospel is responsible for introducing a system that frees people from the restraint of the law, and introduces universal licentiousness. So some interpreted the gospel to be granting a license to sin, a position which would be similar to some who taught that since the body was bad, but the spirit was good, it was acceptable to sin in the body.  Paul’s response to this is the same emphatic No.

In another sense Paul is saying, even If while they sought justification by Christ alone, and taught others to do so, if they themselves were found indulging in sin would that not make Christ the minister of sin? His reaction is one of abhorrence at the thought. God forbid! that anyone would entertain such a thought of Christ. It is absurd to think his doctrine would give the least encouragement to sin and sinners. Certainly, Christ is not the promoter of sin.

Clearly they are some things that are considered sin and inconsistent with a position of being placed in a right relationship (justified by God). All who have been justified must never and can never continue to live a life of sin.  One cannot be led by the Spirit and keep on doing the things of the flesh, demonstrating that one is being led by the flesh, slipping back into the terrible condition of bondage which exists when one is in sin.  No Apostle of Christ would ever countenance such an argument, that sinning as a way of life is consistent with being justified by God.

For if I build..this is the explanation of his abrupt denial in verse 17. Paul and the Apostles were emphatic that they were never and would never be inconsistent in allowing sin in the life of a believer, for the believer had been placed by God into a right relationship with Him and must remain steadfast.

Paul is emphatic that he did not commit sin by violating the “ works of the law”, no law acceptable to Christ ever stated that eating with Gentiles was equivalent to sinning.  There were no statutes in the law that conflicted with those who were justified in Christ.

If Paul had been counselling behavior that involved the building up of the things that had been done away with, then he would show himself to be a transgressor. Gentiles and Jews were in Christ and on the basis of this common faith in Christ, no law could be used to condemn table fellowship with Gentiles.  There would then be absolutely no idea that Christ is an agent of sin, should justified Jews and Gentiles have table fellowship.

No Law could separate Jews and Gentiles, for both were in Christ as members of one indivisible body.  Any law separating Jew and Gentiles could never be applicable and if Paul were to rebuild such a law, then Paul would be proved to be a sinner on the basis of that law.  Peter’s vacillating conduct at Antioch, where his behavior created barriers between Jews and Gentiles is typical of the issue Paul has in mind.

The things which I destroyed is then those prescriptions of the traditions of men that are sometimes confused with the ceremonial law that were peculiarly Jewish; the washings, circumcision, meal protocol etc.

Peter and all the Apostles had long agreed that Gentiles would be admitted into full fellowship.  Paul rightly insisted that this law of God was to be consistently followed, for that law had stated that Gentiles would be blessed through Messiah.  The many promises in Scripture had stated that the blessing of Abraham would also come to the Gentiles when they receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

It must be noted that Jews are at liberty to do some of these things but to enjoin them on Gentiles is contrary to the gospel. Christ has broken down the middle wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles.

As noted in last week’s lesson it is important for Christians to know those things that Jesus’ death has rendered irrelevant, since historically and currently there is a concerted effort afoot to distance the church from its Jewish roots. This is wrong and involves disobedience, for it violates clear teachings of Scripture. This practice can be easily seen in the Church’s disregard of the 7^th day Sabbath, which was established at creation and enjoined on all men.; sprinkling instead of believers’ baptism and so on. Text such as Galatians 2:18 among others have been misinterpreted to justify this stance. (See Lesson 9). Note that many of these anti-Scriptural practises developed as ‘political correctness’ to accommodate the new people who had come into the Church and to further the political, economic and state interests of the apostate Roman rulers, who entered the church and corrupted it with power and wealth. Scriptures were then twisted to justify these actions and traditions developed to buttress these pagan tainted positions.

Even though Paul writes personally (I) this is a general proposition, meaning if anyone does it, he becomes a transgressor. The sense is, that if a man, disavows or destroys something that is evil and then reintroduces it or establishes it, he does wrong and is a transgressor of the law of God.

Obviously they were groups of Jews now and then, who did not believe they needed a Messiah for salvation.  Paul had faced them often in the synagogues and reasoned with both Jews and Greeks about this matter, for they believed that because they had the law, and because they were the sons of Abraham they would be saved.  Paul had frequently ran into these ideas and had to teach the Jews, as well as the Greeks that were swayed by this doctrine that the law could not save them.  He had to constantly teach that the truth was that Jews and Greeks (Gentiles) needed a Savior.

To the self-centered Jews this doctrine was a stumbling block, and to the self-centered Greeks (Gentiles) it was foolishness.This situation reminds us that when people come to Christ, it is a constant battle to get rid of these self-centered positions of the flesh that are so deeply ingrained in men.

Thus the role of leadership is very important.  Their role is to retain the truth of the gospel and to remind people constantly, about what the gospel meansThey must get people to face the painful fact that anyone who comes with a different gospel has already damned himself and he has not found the truth.  Those who teach anything different from the gospel are accursed, and they seek to pull others along with them, so that they will be accursed.

It is very serious for people to encourage others to move away from the pure word of God, to call the word of God irrelevant or to be interpreted as belonging to a culture other  than their own.  The traditions of men that conflict with the Scriptures are to be rejected.

The works of the flesh, the immorality, greed, chasing after wealth and power, enmity, strive, selfishness, impurity, idolatry, superiority complexes and the like must be repudiated.

One might argue that they had failed to understand the message of Christ crucified, but this message had been evidently laid out before them simply and clearly. For them not to understand meant that they were foolish.  Being foolish really means that your pride has made you reject God. Calling them foolish would certainly smack at their pride, which often is at the root of this kind of error; where people begin to think that “they” earn their salvation. The teachers of this ‘other gospel’ were certainly proud of their spirituality and it would be no stretch to find it in their adherents. 

Nowadays people similarly teach techniques which when mastered, will give one that power and authority to do great things.  This of course negates the teaching of the gospel, that it is Christ living in a believer, who is doing the great and wonderful things.  Pride is certainly a powerful, subtle, seductive, and distressing sin and a sin most common throughout the ages for both Jews and Gentile.

Paul’s use of bewitched, a word that suggests magic and spells, speaks to the cunning of the false teachers, even though the Galatians were still foolish to have fallen for the error.

Here he makes an appeal to the early Christian experience of the Galatians.  Did they come into possession of the Spirit of God by works of Law, or by the hearing of
faith? The receiving of the Spirit is a reference to their salvation. To convince them of the folly of their departing from his doctrine, he wants them to recall how they came by the spiritual gifts and graces in the first place.

The Galatians were of course Gentiles and they would remember that the apostle had not insisted on the observance of all the Jewish Law for salvation. Paul seems content to rest his case on this one question.

The question, of course, indicates that the indwelling of the Spirit comes by faith (Acts 5:32; 19:2; 11:17; Rom 10:16). Since the Galatians were without the Law when Paul came to them, it is clear that they would have to acknowledge that they received the Spirit by faith alone. Thus, circumcision and any other rite is ruled out as a necessity for salvation.

Verse 3.   Here Paul presses the point with another question. He expresses a sense of incredulity that the Galatians could be so unwise. The work of salvation would then be the work of God and the work of man; an obvious contradiction, even to these bewitched Galatians. The works of the law would be those deeds from the Mosaic law as popularly interpreted by some groups (and they were many and varied in their different emphasis) that the false teachers insisted the Galatians perform. The implication was, they were saved by faith but sanctified by works, that is, perfected by the flesh as opposed to the Spirit.

This made no sense, for if they were saved by the Spirit, a most unusual and of course supernatural work of unheard of power, common sense would indicate that the Spirit would perfect them, completing his work. If keeping the law cannot save, how could it sanctify?

Paul is inviting them to consider their past and present conduct to see if they were not acting unreasonably. His argument is based on a principle that is both scriptural and logical: the means for justification is the same means for sanctification, (Phil.1:6; Col. 2:6).

By the flesh….by the observance of some rite involving the flesh, whether or not Jewish or Gentile. 

The Spirit started it and the Spirit would finish it.  The Spirit had brought to them the experiences of the full blessings of God, and nothing , certainly not the flesh, could do anything close.

Verse 4.   Paul’s question here suggests the Galatians salvation had come at some cost to themselves and the false teachers likely suggested an appealing alternative to suffering and adversity. Since the apostles had suffered for their faith and it was expected that suffering would be an unavoidable part of the Christian experience, it is a fair assumption that Paul would have alerted the Galatians to the likelihood of suffering in their coming experiences.

By reminding them of what they had endured on account of their attachment to the true gospel, they could decide if what they had originally believed was false, in which case they would have suffered in vain.

Note that Paul is reminding them that they had suffered many things because of their faith in God and he makes plain in the next verse that the Spirit had ministered to them, performing miracles, keeping them, so that they had evidence that they had been accepted by God.

Paul is not about to write them off, despite the serious nature of their departure from the gospel nor does he consider their sufferings a vain experience but he rues what might turn out to be a waste, by their foolish decision to abandon the gospel.

There are no rewards for those that abandon the gospel, only judgment.

Verse 5.   The Apostle continues the same line of reasoning he started in verse 2, regarding the manifestations of the Spirit in their lives. He reminds them of their experiences of the gifts of the Spirit and asks whether these manifestations were the product of the Law or faith? Since the Law was unknown to these Gentiles, the answer to the question is obvious (2 Cor. 12:12).

Certainly the Galatians seemed to have experienced a full array of the charismatic gifts when Paul first preached the gospel to them, for the word ministereth means to supply abundantly. It would be very difficult for the Galatians or the false teachers to attribute their past experiences and spiritual blessings to anything or anyone other than divine activity.

Some view the miraculous works as being done by apostles, including Paul himself. One commentator writes: He puts them in mind that they had had ministers among them (and particularly himself) who came with a divine seal and commission; for they had ministered the Spirit to them, and wrought miracles among them: and he appeals to them whether they did it by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith, whether the doctrine that was preached by them, and confirmed by the miraculous gifts and operations of the Spirit, was that of justification by the works of the law or by the faith of Christ; they very well knew that it was not the former, but the latter; and therefore must needs be inexcusable in forsaking a doctrine which had been so signally owned and attested, and exchanging it for one that had received no such attestations.

CONCLUSION

The case is conclusively made that justification is not by the works of the law but by faith through the grace of God. Any thought, belief or action to link salvation to anything but the faith of Christ, is to declare his sacrifice a futile and unnecessary endeavour which believers do not need.

Believers must recognize that they are in Christ and their lives are hid with him.

Believers are the Temple of the Holy Spirit and everything about them must be laid as instruments of righteousness.

It is most important to recognize that if one is a true believer, Christ is living his life through you. This is done by means of the possession of the Holy Spirit.  If you do not have the Spirit and are thereby led by him, you do not belong Christ.  There is to be no question then about the Lordship of Christ or their being any part of our life over which we personally have control. 

God wants every part of us, no exception.  Let us examine ourselves, and not be fooled into thinking that we can direct the course of our lives and please God.  A true believer must actively yield themselves as instruments to be used by God, and must reject depending on rituals or any other thing.

This lesson highlights the serious threat that false teachers pose to believers. These Galatians had heard the true gospel from Paul himself and received salvation. Yet soon after they were lured into error, by what must have been very attractive teachings. Clearly all believers are prone to this failing and it behoves all Christians to carefully examine all teaching, especially what appears to be new.