Galatians Chapter 2

Galatians 2:1

“Then after the space of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus also with me.“

Paul writes that after the space of fourteen year” he went back to Jerusalem.  After leaving Jerusalem the first time after his conversion, he spent fourteen years out of the company of the center of operations for the apostles.  Paul is making the point here that he was acting independently of the Jerusalem church. 

There is a point of disagreement here among the scholars as to which trip to Jerusalem Paul is speaking of here.  There are two visits recorded in Acts.  The first is documented in Acts 11:27-30.  There was a great famine in Judea and Paul along with his traveling companions brought money contributed by gentile churches for the purpose of famine relief to the Judean congregations. The timing of this trip by Paul and Barnabas coincides with the time Herod had James the brother of Zebedee killed and imprisoned Peter.  This is the famous account where Peter was miraculously released from prison by an angel of the Lord.  According to Luke in Acts 12:1 all of these events occurred about the same time. 

The second trip is recorded in Acts 15 and documents what is known today as the Jerusalem Council which convened specifically to answer the question of whether or not Gentile Christians had to be circumcised.  The result of that meeting was that it was settled and declared that Gentiles had the same entrance requirements to the kingdom of God that Jews had.  The sect that had been going behind Paul and teaching that Gentiles had to observe specific tenants of the old law in order to become Christians had been denounced publicly and finally by the Apostles, in Jerusalem. 

The dispute among the scholars is over which one of these trips Paul is referring to in Galatians.  His wording in verse 1 appears to mean that it was fourteen years between his first and second trip to Jerusalem.  The difficulty with that is that it is difficult to reconcile that with his historical timeline.  Paul’s conversion happened about 34 AD.  Herod Agrippa had James the brother of Zebedee executed and he imprisoned Peter in about 44AD which was just prior to his death by worms at the hands of an angel of the Lord as recorded in Acts 12.  According to Acts 12, Paul’s famine trip to Jerusalem and Herod’s Agrippa’s death were more or less concurrent events, give or take a couple of years.  The date of Herod Agrippa’s death is a matter of historical fact.  Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem happened three years or so after his conversion which would make it about 37 AD.  The problem is that there is not fourteen years between 37 AD and 44 AD. 

A possible explanation is that Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem, being not for the purpose of the dispute at hand was simply not accounted for in his account in Galatians.  That famine relief visit had nothing to do with the issue at hand and he disregarded any mention of it in favor of the pressing argument for his authority as a genuine Apostle.  The wording does not necessarily exclude any other visits. It does say that there was a period of fourteen years between his first visit and another one. 

Galatians 2:2
“And I went up by revelation; and I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles but privately before them who were of repute, lest by any means I should be running, or had run, in vain.”

Paul was directed by the Holy Spirit to make this trip.  It was time to put this issue to rest once and for all and the Holy Spirit was directing the actions of Paul leading up to it.  This is not the first account we have of the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit in the affairs of spreading the gospel throughout the world.  See Acts 10:19; 11:12; 13:2; 16:7. 

When Paul said “he went up by revelation” he meant that it had been revealed to him divinely that he was to do this.  Paul was letting his readership know that he was getting his marching orders directly from the highest source.  And it was at the command of the Holy Spirit that he made this trip to Jerusalem thereby giving this action His divine approval. 

Paul’s entire defense of himself as an Apostle rests on citing divine authority.  There is an application to be made for us today in this account.  Paul backed everything he said up with divine authority.  We today can emulate that practice in our religious lives and be assured of living according to God’s will.  In short, Paul cited a “thus saith the Lord” for his actions leading up to his visit to Jerusalem. Today, if everyone claiming Christ as savior would similarly demand and demonstrate divine authority for what they say and do and reject those things for which there is none, there would be a lot less religious division among those professing Christianity. 

“and I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles but privately before them who were of repute“

Paul went straight to Peter, James, John (V-9), and others who were reputed leaders of the church in Jerusalem to demonstrate to them the gospel he preached.    He knew they also had to be acting under the direct supervision of the Holy Spirit as was he and he knew the best way to confront this issue was to bypass the trouble makers and go straight to the top of those in charge on earth.  He was an apostle as was Peter and John therefore Paul knew that they at least were receiving divine directions at this point.  So this issue was going to be settled first among these apostles before going any further. 

“lest by any means I should be running, or had run, in vain“

If the apostles in Jerusalem did not agree with Paul, then his entire trip to Jerusalem was a waste.  The Judaizers were coming out of Judea and going to the gentiles with their heresy.  Unless all of the apostles agreed and sent that message out together, the actions of the Judaizers would never be stopped and Paul’s efforts in his trip to Jerusalem along with his evangelizing efforts of the past seventeen years would have been for nothing.  The Judaizers were destroying everything Paul did with their heresy.  It is vitally important to keep in mind that both the Judaizers and those who would succumb to their heresy were doomed (Galatians 1:9, Galatians 5:4).  It concerned Paul greatly to think of the possibility that all the Christians he worked to evangelize would be lost if this heresy went unchecked. 

Galatians 2:3
“But not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised:“

Paul had taken Titus, an uncircumcised gentile Christian, with him to this council and he was not required to be circumcised by the Apostles.  The Judaizers attempted to compel Titus to submit to circumcision but were completely rebuffed. 

Galatians 2:4
“and that because of the false brethren privily brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:“

Titus was not circumcised, the mention of the false brethren being for the purpose of showing how the question came up.  Paul had come to Jerusalem specifically to address this issue and while he was there conferring with the leaders of the church about it, some from the very group of false teachers he came to refute were snuck in by someone on the inside for the express purpose of trying to force circumcision on Titus and to bring the Christians under the bondage of the old law. 

These Judaizers were bold, quick to act, had internal support and were organized to the degree that they nearly met Paul and company at the doors with their heresy.  Let’s keep in mind also that they had already sent Judaizers out into the gentile world and they had successfully managed to lure whole congregations away from the truth.  This had developed into a serious problem and was threatening the existence of the church.  It’s no wonder Paul was sent to Jerusalem to face this problem head on (V-2).  This apostasy was entirely Jewish in origin and had developed to the degree it had under the noses of the apostles in Jerusalem.  The leaders of the church in Jerusalem weren’t getting it done so Paul was sent to clean up the mess.  Paul’s visit to Jerusalem brought the whole issue to the surface and forced the leaders of the church there to face it and deal with it in a more direct manner.  The Jerusalem council resulted in a letter being written by the leaders of the church which Paul and company took with them (Acts 15:23-29).  This letter from the church in Jerusalem utterly destroyed the doctrine the Judaizers were forcing on the Gentile Christians. 

“privily brought in“

The fact that these Judaizing spies were snuck in secretly suggests that they knew their doctrine would be challenged by the apostles.  If they had been confident of their doctrine, they most certainly would have come boldly in the front door and challenged Paul and company to the face.  This is how it is with change agents bringing false doctrine into the church.  They come  in with stealth under the guise of innocence and corrupt the way of truth with their heresy out of sight of those who would oppose them. 

Galatians 2:5
“to whom we gave place in the way of subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.“

They did not yield in any way to the demands of the Judaizers.  They stood steadfast and immovable (1 Corinthians 15:58) and refused to submit to them. 

“that the truth of the gospel might continue with you”

The Judaizers were spreading their heresy wherever they could.  This letter by Paul to the churches in Galatia is proof that their efforts had reached that far.  Paul and company resisted their heresy at the council so that it could be defeated abroad.  The only way truth would prevail in Galatia was for the error to be stopped coming out of Jerusalem.  Before that could happen, the Jerusalem church had to send a unified message from the leadership there.  This message was sent out in part by letters recorded in Acts 15:23-29.

Galatians 2:6
“But from those who were reputed to be somewhat (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth not man’s person) — they, I say, who were of repute imparted nothing to me:“

But from those who were claimed to be the leaders of the Jerusalem church.  Their station in the minds of the people made no difference to Paul.  Neither does it make any difference to God.  God does not accept man’s ideas on righteousness.  In other words, it makes no difference what the leaders in Jerusalem say, if it’s not God’s will, it’s not the truth and God will not accept it.  Man does not have the authority to make doctrine under any circumstances.  Man cannot approach God with his own righteousness (Romans 10:3, Philippians 3:9). 

“they, I say, who were of repute imparted nothing to me“

There is no part of the gospel that Paul did not already know.  The leaders of the Jerusalem church taught him nothing about the truth that Paul did not already have.  Paul went to Jerusalem for one reason and it did not include learning anything from them at all.  Paul already knew the gospel in its entirety and and had preached the whole counsel of God to the churches in Galatia. 

Galatians 2:7
“but contrariwise, when they saw that I had been intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter with (the gospel) of the circumcision“

The Jerusalem council recognized that God had fully inspired Paul to carry the gospel to the Gentiles the same as He had inspired Peter to the Jews.  God who commissioned Peter to work as an apostle among the Jews equally charged Paul to work among the Gentiles.  The gospel is the same, however the sphere of influence was different.  Paul was directed to the Gentiles at his conversion (Acts 9:15) and later in Acts  22:17-21). 

We need to bear in mind that Paul’s directive to the Gentiles was not exclusive of the Jews.  It was Paul’s habit when he came to a new city to go to the Jewish synagogues first (Acts 13:14; 14:1; 17:1-2; 18:3; 18:19; 19:8).  This was the most favorable location for the beginning of the gospel work as the synagogues were frequented by Jews who already believed in God and had knowledge of the old testament scriptures regarding the coming of the Messiah.  The synagogues were also used by the Jewish proselytes which provided the most expedient avenue to the rest of the Gentiles.  As was often the case, Paul’s evangelizing efforts were much more effective among the Gentiles than they were to the Jews.  Often times, Paul’s life was in jeopardy from the Jews while the Gentiles were a lot more receptive to the gospel. 

Galatians 2:8
“(for he that wrought for Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision wrought for me also unto the Gentiles);“

The gospel is the same for each group of people.  The scope of influence was different.  One gospel, two different mission fields.  Paul made the universal application of the gospel for all mankind in Galatians 3:28 where he wrote, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.“

Galatians 2:9
“and when they perceived the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision;“

Paul identifies the leaders of the Jerusalem church by name here.  Upon hearing the gospel Paul had been preaching to the Gentiles, they completely approved and offered their right hands in fellowship.  To offer one’s hand in fellowship is to acknowledge, condone and support what they are teaching.  Offering the right hand of fellowship is the same thing as saying we are unified. 

Paul’s point to his readership is that they added nothing to what he had been preaching.  No corrections were made, no additions, no subtractions, therefore what Paul had been telling them all along was the truth.  The obvious conclusion being that what the Judaizers had been saying all along was not the truth and should be rejected.

“that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision“

Paul was to continue his evangelical efforts within his divinely appointed sphere while they, meaning Peter, James and John, would proceed with theirs.  No changes were made to anything.  Upon completion of the Jerusalem council, it was decided that Paul was acting under the authority of God, preaching the whole counsel of God and now bearing the right hand of fellowship with the reputed pillars of the Jerusalem church.

What a blow this must have been to the Judaizers.  They were expecting something entirely different but were disappointed.  Paul shows up in Jerusalem with Titus who was an uncircumcised Gentile and are confronted almost immediately about it and after a meeting with at least Peter, James and John, they leave with their approval and no doctrinal changes made to what they had been preaching among the Gentiles. 

Now Paul could return to his work and confront the Judaizers with the endorsement of the leaders of the Jerusalem church.  Not that he needed their approval other than it was to the authority of these men as genuine apostles they appealed.  The Judaizers had been attacking Paul’s station as an apostle and preaching another gospel to the gentiles in the name of the apostles working from Jerusalem.

Peter, James and John were to return to their work among the Jews, referred to as “the circumcision” by Paul.  They had their work to do as well.  They had a considerable organization of Judaizers to confront and refute.  Peter, however did act in support of Paul when he penned the epistle we refer to as 1 Peter.  It was specifically addressed to the Gentile population of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia (1 Peter 1:1).  Written around 65 AD, it forever unified the gospel among the Gentiles and Jews and sealed the fate of the Judaizing doctrine that had been promulgated among the Gentiles.  There is not one hint in Peter’s epistle to the Gentiles about the necessity of circumcision in order for Gentiles to become Christians. 

Galatians 2:10
“only (they would) that we should remember the poor; which very thing I was also zealous to do.“

This was the only exhortation Peter, James and John had for Paul.  This was all they had to add to what Paul had been teaching in his evangelistic efforts.  And according to Paul, he was already diligent in his efforts to do that without being told to do so.  The conclusion here is that what Paul had been teaching the churches in Galatia was the truth, complete and authoritative.  On the other hand, what the churches in Galatia were being taught by the apostates coming out of Judea was false and utterly without divine authority of any kind. 

Further evidence of his independence by referencing his personal rebuke of Peter and others over their dissimilation (Gal 2:11-15).

Galatians 2:11
“But when Cephas came to Antioch, I resisted him to the face, because he stood condemned.“

There were two cities in ancient times named Antioch.  Both cities were founded by Seleucus Nicator, ruler of Syria from 301-380 BC, and named for his father Antiochus. 

     1. Antioch in Pisidia of the Roman province of Galatia   This city was built on a plateau commanding one of the roads leading from the East to the Maeander River and Ephesus.  It is mentioned in the Bible in connection with the visits of the apostle Paul on his various missionary journeys.  On his first visit Paul preached the gospel in the synagogue and incurred the wrath of a number of the Jews of that city.  So opposed were they to his preaching that they continued their persecution of him when he journeyed to Lystra.  On the backswing of the first journey, he passed through Antioch again. It is to be assumed that he also visited the city on his second and third tours. References to Antioch in Galatia are found in Acts 13:14; Acts 14:19, 21.

     2. Antioch in Syria   Seleucus Nicator founded this Antioch on the banks of the Orontes River, about fifteen miles inland.  This Antioch grew to be a large and prosperous city.  She was the third city of the empire, ranking behind only Rome and Alexandria.  Antioch is best known to Christians as the cradle of Gentile Christianity and as the headquarters for Paul’s missionary efforts.  It was largely because of the church at Antioch that the council at Jerusalem declared that Gentile Christians were not subject to the Jewish law.  It was here, during the early labors of Paul and Barnabas, that the followers of Jesus were first called Christians.  Antioch continued to be a center of Christianity and Christian scholarship for many years after the apostolic era.  This Antioch is the one to whom Paul is here referring and was located roughly 300 miles from Jerusalem. References to Antioch in Syria are found in Acts 6:5; Acts 11:19,26.

After the Jerusalem council it was decided to write a letter and send it with some of the leading men of the church in Jerusalem to Antioch with Paul and company in order to demonstrate their unity with Paul and to help put down the Judaizing element within the church (Acts 15:20-30). While they were there, Peter made a visit to Antioch.  While on this visit, Peter at first ate with the Gentiles.  But when some of the Judaizers came from Jerusalem, he withdrew and associated only with the Jewish Christians. 

Upon seeing this, Paul, who had just come from a successful trip to Jerusalem where he had secured the unity and support of the Jerusalem church over this very issue, and carrying a letter written by the authority of Peter (Acts 15:23-29), which denied any form of Judaism, witnessed Peter’s hypocrisy and confronted him to the face about it.  This is a powerful testament to the passion and boldness of Paul over this matter.  Paul was a champion of the gospel, a true soldier of Christ in every respect.  Paul confronted Peter to the face in front of his peers, and in front of the Judaizers. 

We can draw a number of conclusions from this, but first we must acknowledge that Paul meant Peter no harm in this matter.  Paul mentioned that Peter “stood condemned“, therefore Peter’s actions had resulted in placing him in such a position that his eternal security
was in jeopardy.  Peter was in as much danger here as Simon the Sorcerer was when he tried to buy the ability to pass on the miraculous spiritual gifts of the Holy Spirit in Acts 8:20.   Peter confronted Simon on that occasion, now Peter stood condemned for actions of his own and Paul pointed out his error to him.  

One conclusion we can draw from this is the overwhelming influence this Judaizing force had within the Christian community.  The Judaizers were not successful in Jerusalem at the council so they decided to follow these men to Antioch.  They were not giving up easily and deliberately went to Antioch in order to pursue their efforts there.  They had gone behind Paul before and been successful, so now they were going back to what had worked in the past.  Paul left the Jerusalem council with overwhelming support but this did not stop the Judaizers.  They were determined to do whatever was necessary in order to achieve their ends, which if left unchecked would have resulted in the condemnation of countless souls. 

Paul knew all this and his purpose for confronting Peter had far reaching implications.  The hypocrisy of Peter on this instance would have fueled the fire of the Judaizers.  They would have noticed this and would have been all the more determined in their efforts.  Peter was not alone in this either.  The racial prejudice which fueled this Judaizing heresy was deeply ingrained into the lives and attitudes of the Jews.  They had a lot of that to overcome, but this did not relinquish them from the obligation to do so.  It is significant to keep in mind that Peter stood condemned for it.  Their racial prejudice was serious then and it is serious now wherever it may rear its ugly head.  There is no room in the heart of any Christian for racial bigotry.  It will open the door for all kinds of heresy within the Lord’s church and will result in the condemnation of souls if left unchecked as surely as it would have in the New Testament church of the first century. 

Galatians 2:12
“For before that certain came from James, he ate with the Gentiles; but when they came, he drew back and separated himself, fearing them that were of the circumcision.“

The leaders of the Judaizing faction apparently approached James after Paul, Peter and the rest of the group left Jerusalem.  Apparently after failing to find any support there, they set out on their own journey to Antioch in order to try and push their agenda there.  This was their usual mode of operation, having been successful with similar tactics. 

The text appears to suggest that these Judaizers might have come from the presence of James bearing his approval.  Such is not the case as evidenced in the letter written by the spiritual leaders in Jerusalem which demonstrates that they were all of one accord on this issue and had already given Paul and company the right hand of fellowship (V-9).  James was mentioned as one of the “pillars” of the church which were in attendance at the council.  In addition, the letter written by the leaders in Jerusalem stated in Acts 15:24, “Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law” — to whom we gave no such commandment“.  James was one of the authors of this letter, it being sent by his approval and with his authority as well as the others and being in the possession of those with whom he had previously extended the right hand of fellowship to.  These Judaizers were acting outside the approval of James back in Jerusalem.  Therefore having been unsuccessful with appealing to James in the absence of the others, they resorted to coming to Antioch directly with the intentions of bringing the Gentiles under the law of Moses. 

Prior to the arrival of the Judaizers, Peter was eating and fellowshipping the Gentile Christians in Antioch as brethren.  But when they showed up in Antioch and stirred up the prejudice which fueled the Judaizing heresy, Peter withdrew from association with the Gentiles.  It is evident that Peter’s defection was obvious to everyone there. 

Galatians 2:13
“And the rest of the Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that even Barnabas was carried away with their dissimulation.“

When Peter, an Apostle and recognized leader of the church withdrew from eating with the Gentiles it was more than the rest of the Jews could bear.  Even Barnabas, Paul’s companion and trusted ally on the trip to the Jerusalem yielded and joined in with their withdrawal from the Gentiles.  Peter should have stood strong on this occasion, recognizing that his failure would cause others to stumble.  The church needed a leader and Peter missed the mark and because of it, other Jews stumbled and fell in with Peter’s transgression. 

Those who are the spiritual leaders in the church then and today have a serious responsibility to live as an example to others.  When a spiritual leader stumbles and falls, many who look up to them as examples find themselves shaken in their convictions and will stumble as well.  It is important for those who take on the responsibilities of Elders, Deacons, preachers and teachers of the word to recognize this and order their lives with this in mind.  The inspired words of James in 3:1-2 are appropriate, “My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.”  Those who are teachers and spiritual leaders have an awesome responsibility and must conduct their lives as if others are watching all of the time.

Galatians 2:14
But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Cephas before (them) all, If thou, being a Jew, livest as do the Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, how compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

Paul, ever a bold and staunch supported of the truth confronted Peter with his error in front of everyone present at that occasion.  Peter was guilty of hypocrisy.  He was a natural born Jew who had abandoned the abrogated law of Moses and was living a Christian life just like the rest of the Gentiles.  Yet when confronted with the racial prejudice of the Judaizers, he, with his actions in withdrawing from them, was compelling them to live as do the Jews who were still practicing Judaism.  In other words, Peter had rejected the Law of Moses and was not living according to it, but compelled his Gentile brethren to do so.  Peter was guilty of hypocrisy and Paul called him on it face to face and in public.  

Paul’s rebuke of Peter was not meant to be damaging to him rather it was meant to underscore Paul’s independence from them as far their authority goes.  Paul’s entire purpose in this section of the letter is to establish the fact that he was preaching the true gospel independent from the rest and that he was not in any way deriving his authority or teaching from anyone other than God. 

Galatians 2:15
“We being Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles”

Paul is still speaking to Peter here. “We” meaning those of us who are Jewish born Christians.  Paul identifies who he is talking about here by including himself in their company. 

“and not sinners of the Gentiles”

And not of those formerly outside the family of God under the old law.  Paul is drawing a contrast between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians.  This phrase illustrates the insolent contempt of the Judaizers toward the Gentiles.  Paul does not exhibit this trait as evidenced by his staunch support of them as Christians, however the racial prejudice of the Judaizers is illustrated here.  Many Jews just cannot get over the fact that they are no longer born into the family of God.  No one under the new law can claim to be in the family of God as their birthright.  They were having difficulty with the concept that all must die to their old selves and be reborn as a child of God equally with the Gentiles.

Paul did not use this phrase in a derogatory manner toward his readership.  One would not naturally insult their readership in a letter meant to exhort and edify them.  Paul also used the term “Heathen” (Ethnos in Greek), to refer to the Gentiles in Galatians 1:16; 2:9 and 3:8.   The term is not meant to be demeaning at all in this letter.  We must be careful not to project our own conceptions on prejudism onto the narrative.  Moreover, Paul clears any misconceptions his readers may have over his words here in his very next sentence recorded in part in V-17 where he places his own nationality on an equal playing field with them in respect to justification before God. 

A summary statement in direct opposition to the teachings of those who had perverted the truth. (Gal 2:16-21).

Galatians 2:16
“yet knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we believed on Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the law: because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.”

“Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law“.  The law in view in this context is the law of Moses.  Keeping in mind the former context, the Jews in company with Paul who came into Christ knew that no one is justified by the works of the Jewish law.  Many Jews knew this as evidenced by the unanimous support Paul received in Jerusalem from the church leaders there. 

This Bible student has seen this verse of scripture used out of context on many instances to advance the doctrine of salvation by faith alone.  It is alleged from this verse of scripture that the reference to the law is actually a reference to God’s law under the new covenant.  If this were true, then one would not even be required to believe in Jesus in order to be saved.  Either we are accountable to God’s law or we are not.  There can be no partial accountability, one cannot pick and choose what they wish to obey, moreover one cannot be bound salvationally to one tenant of God’s law and released from all the others. 

A Biblical definition of sin can be found in 1 John 3:4, “Every one that doeth sin doeth also lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.”  The KJV renders this verse thus: “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.”  The Bible defines the scope of sin as encompassing all mankind for “all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God” (Romans 3:23).  Therefore if all of God’s law were in Paul’s view in this verse then there would be no condemnation for lawlessness, therefore there would be no such thing as sin and everyone alive on earth today could expect to inherit a home in heaven with God forever.  We know this is not the case from verses of scripture such as Matthew 7:13-14 which reads, “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.“

It is evident from an examination of the entire content of the letter of Galatians as it stands in relation to the rest of God’s word that Paul’s reference to the law in the immediate context of this passage is limited to the law of Moses.  Any attempt to extend it further in scope results in contradictions of God’s word elsewhere when the results are thought through to their logical conclusions.

“but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we believed on Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ”

Paul is contrasting the law of Moses with faith in Christ which is further characterized as “the faith” in Galatians 3:14 in the original language.  The KJV, NKJV, ASV, ESV, NASB which are all recognized as being literal translations leave the definite article out of the translation, rendering it simply “faith”.   Young’s literal translation is one translation which renders it correctly, “that to the nations the blessing of Abraham may come in Christ Jesus, that the promise of the Spirit we may receive through the faith“.  This makes Paul’s usage of the word for “faith” here and elsewhere in scripture representative of the gospel system of faith. 

If Paul meant to contrast faith with God’s law today, then he is contradicting scripture which elsewhere defines “faith” as law such as in Romans 3:27 where by inspiration, Paul is contrasting the law of Moses and the law of Faith, “Where then is the glorying? It is excluded. By what manner of law? of works? Nay: but by a law of faith.” (ASV).  The NKJV renders this as “the law of faith“.  Faith cannot be called a law by inspiration if it is not a law.  It is not a law in the sense that the law of Moses was with its tedious system of complicated ordinances associated with religious law along with the fact that it was also the national constitution of the nation of Israel.  But the “Law of Christ” as Paul defines it in Galatians 6:2 is a rule of conduct or behavior which the faithful Christian will adhere to as a result of his or her desire to please God through obedience of His will stemming from their love for God and a genuine desire to live faithfully from the heart. 

It is important when examining one’s doctrine that they think the results through to the end.  In other words, what does my doctrinal conclusion result in when compared to the word of God in all other instances.  Many people today use this verse in Galatians to set forth the doctrine of salvation by faith only by applying Paul’s reference here to the law of God in the new covenant.  They contrast faith and obedience to God instead of contrasting the law of Moses against the system of faith we live under today, the latter being in the inspired viewpoint of Paul.   Faith as a mental exercise in and of itself is one act which one must engage in to obey the law of God.  Now if Paul meant in this verse that mental belief could set aside the law of God, then why would one need to repent, or be born again, or confess Christ as the son of God or love their neighbor all of which are acts which Biblically are set forth as absolute requirements for salvation?  We must be careful when considering doctrinal conclusions to take into account what the implications are in other areas of God’s word.  If the doctrinal conclusion results in a transgression of God’s will anywhere or a contradiction of His nature, we must reject it and study further. 

Obedience to the will of God is how Jesus taught in the parable of the wise and foolish builders to have our hopes built on unmovable rock (Matthew 7:21-27, Luke 6:46-49).  Matthew’s account of this parable starts with the words “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven”.  Those who say Lord Lord are believers.  They have faith in the Son of God.  If salvation were by faith alone, then there will be people in the kingdom of heaven who believed in Jesus but did not obey God which is a direct contradiction of what Jesus said here.  Those who teach and practice salvation by faith alone are counting on a salvation where Jesus Christ is a liar and out of union with God the Father.  The implications of this doctrine result in both the direct transgression of God’s will and a contradiction of God’s nature which explicitly states that God cannot lie.  Any belief which results in a contradiction of God’s nature and/or the circumvention of God’s law in any aspect of it anywhere in the new covenant as it applies to us today cannot be the truth. 

“and not by the works of the law: because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.”

The works of the abrogated law of Moses are what in view here.  Under no circumstances can it be supported from an examination of God’s word that Paul is referencing any works of law in any context other than the law of Moses.  Faith as a mental exercise is a work of God’s law under the new covenant.  Paul cannot mean the works under the new law because if he did, then he contradicted himself when he said it was by faith. 

Galatians 2:17
“But if, while we sought to be justified in Christ, we ourselves also were found sinners, is Christ a minister of sin? God forbid.”

In the previous sentence, Paul made reference to the Gentiles as “sinners of the Gentiles“.  The Jewish nation was in for quite a surprise.  While they were seeking to live faithfully in Christ, they were found to be alien sinners, living outside the family of God just like the Gentiles were.  Now under the new faith system, everyone outside Christ is an alien sinner and all are equally accountable, Jew and Gentile alike, are amenable to the terms and conditions set forth as requirements for entering the family of God. 

“is Christ a minister of sin? God forbid.“

Does the fact that Jews and Gentiles are on equal footing under the same system of faith mean that Jesus is an encourager or promoter of sin?  Paul answers that question for them. Compare this statement with one Paul made in Romans 6:15 where he was likewise contrasting the old law with the new system of faith, “What then?  shall we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace? God forbid” (ASV).  There are no circumstances under which Christ can be accused of promoting, encouraging, approving of or ignoring sin in any way shape or form.  Christ is never a promoter, or in acceptance of, sinful behavior.  Paul is telling his readership not to take any of what he is writing as permission to sin. 

Galatians 2:18 For if I build up again those things which I destroyed, I prove myself a transgressor.

Paul had been preaching in the churches everywhere that the old law of Moses was fulfilled and thus abrogated.  He is here stating that if he were to start to rebuild the very things he had torn down it would serve as proof that he was a transgressor.  If he goes back and contradicts what he had previously been teaching, then he has proven himself to be a transgressor of God’s law. 

The “things which I destroyed” which Paul referred to are a reference to the ceremonial regulations of Judaism, and Paul stated here that it would be sinful if after all he reverted back to their observance.

Galatians 2:19
“For I through the law died unto the law, that I might live unto God.”

The old law pointed to Christ.  Jesus taught in “Luke 24:44-48, “…”These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.”  And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures. Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And you are witnesses of these things.“

Paul knew through the teachings of the law of Moses that it was temporary.  Keep in mind that Paul was a Pharisee which was an equivalent of being a modern day doctor of the law.  Many Pharisees had a lot of problems and were subject to a lot of criticism from Christ, but they were highly educated in the law of Moses.  It was not their knowledge that was in question, it was the application of it by some of them that caused them to be condemned by Christ.   In short, Paul knew the law of Moses. 

In Jeremiah 31:31-34 God promised to make a new covenant not according to the one given at Mt. Sinai. Hebrews 8:7-13 quotes Jeremiah, claiming it was fulfilled when the New Testament of Jesus replaced the law given at Sinai.

In Psalm 110:4, Christ was prophesied to be a priest after the order of Melchizedek. Under the Law of Moses, priests had to be of the tribe of Levi.  Christ was also prophesied to be a descendant of David of the tribe of Judah (2 Samuel 7:12, Isaiah 11:1). Hence, if Christ would be a priest of the tribe of Judah, God must have intended all along to bring an end to the Law of Moses.

These Old Testament passages show that God never intended the Law of Moses to be permanent. He said all along that they would someday be replaced by a different system.  Paul knew through the old law that it was was temporary and that he would have to abandon it in favor of a new system of faith.  So in keeping with what the old law taught concerning its fulfillment and subsequent replacement, Paul “died unto the law“, meaning he cast off the old law in favor of the new law.  It is important here to realize that through a proper understanding of the old testament, anyone can recognize that Jesus of Nazareth is the promised Messiah, and the old law of Moses is set aside in favor of the new covenant.

“that I might live unto God.”

Paul understood that in order to be justified and live faithfully as a child of God, he had to die to the old law and live according to the will of God under the new system of faith.  Living unto God means living and serving Him obediently. 

In order for Paul to become alive unto God it was necessary for him to be dead to the Law of Moses.  It is vital that we keep in mind which law is in view in this context.  Under no circumstances can this mean that Paul became dead to the law of Christ so that he could live unto God.  Many today point to this context and use it to set forth the belief that Paul’s use of the word “law” here is universally applicable to all of God’s law.  If this were true, then Paul here would be setting aside God’s law on belief as well as the rest.  If any conditions whatsoever exist for the receiving of salvation in any way, then God’s law has not been set aside.  Proponents of the “no law” persuasion are inconsistent in their application.  Either there is law under the new covenant or there is not.  Saying there is no law under the new covenant and then proclaiming any conditions whatsoever for the reception of Salvation is a doctrinal contradiction.  Paul is not teaching that one lives unto God by making oneself universally dead to all of God’s law across the board. 

It was necessary for Paul to become dead to the law of Moses  because the guilt of sin cannot be removed by that law.  Acts 13:38-39, “Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through this Man is preached to you the forgiveness of sins; and by Him everyone who believes is justified from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses.” (NKJV)  Concerning the inability of the law of Moses to justify, the Hebrew writer wrote in 10:1-4, “For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins.  But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year.  For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.” (NKJV)

The application to made from this passage is that to Judaize and return to portions of the old law is to bind oneself to a law that cannot save.  The law of Moses had a purpose for a definite period of time.  Once this period of time expired, the law of Moses was fulfilled and replaced with the law of Christ.  The Judaizers were going behind Paul’s evangelizing efforts and teaching Paul’s converts that they needed to return to a law which could not save them in order to be saved.  We see alot of this in practice today.  There are religious organizations who burn incense as a part of their religious ceremony.  There are those who practice the use of manmade instruments of music in their worship.  These things and more are all integral components of worship under the law of Moses for which there is no authority given under the new covenant. 

Galatians 2:20
I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I that live, but Christ living in me: and that (life) which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, (the faith) which is in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself up for me.

Jesus Christ was executed by crucifixion but He was resurrected and still lives.  Paul uses the death of Christ and His resurrection to draw a comparison between it and his new life in Christ.  When Jesus Christ died, the reign of the law of Moses came to an end.  When Paul converted to Christianity his devotion to that law came to an end.  Jesus Christ was resurrected to reign over His people under the new covenant.  Paul was resurrected to live under the reign of Christ. 

Paul mentions this crucifixion of himself later in the letter in chapter 5, verse 24 which reads, “And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.” (NKJV)  The term crucify carries the meaning of putting someone to death.  In this context, the person put to death is oneself.  Not in a literal sense but in the sense that their former fleshly desires no longer reign over them.  Instead of practicing a lifestyle which pursues the desires of the flesh, they practice a lifestyle of self denial in favor of righteousness. 

Being crucified with Christ also means to die with Christ.  There is a connection between dying with Christ and Christian baptism.  Paul draws a direct connection between being dead to sin and baptism into Christ in Romans 6:1-3, “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?” (NKJV).  Paul goes on to write in verses 4-12 of Romans 6 about the putting to death of one’s fleshly desires.  Paul’s mention of being crucified with Christ in Galatians 2:20 has a direct  connection between the crucifixion of Christ and Christian baptism.  It is at the point of baptism where the Christian reckons himself to be dead to sin just as Christ was.  The initial crucifixion of the flesh occurs at one’s baptism into Christ and then starts one out on the path of a lifelong pattern of self denial of personal passions and lusts thus allowing Christ to reign over their life which includes ruling their behavior.  

“it is no longer I that live, but Christ living in me”

Paul died to the law of Moses, and he also died to himself.  He was still alive physically but he was no longer the master of his own life.  His life was now wholly under the direction of Jesus Christ.  He was so dead to his former life and so much under the direction of Christ that he said Christ was actually “living in me“.  That is how Christ operates in all of us.  He lives and reigns in us and through us by His word which is recorded for us by inspiration of the holy scriptures.  When we subject ourselves to the authority of Christ and live according to His will, He lives within us. 

“and that (life) which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, (the faith) which is in the Son of God“

Jesus Christ died literally and was resurrected.  Paul did not literally die and then become alive again like Jesus did.  Paul used this to illustrate how completely he had died to the old law.  Paul’s new life, while still in the flesh, is lived in the faith which is in the Son of God.  There are many translations from the original language here that differ from one another.  The KJV translates this as “I live by the faith of the Son of God“.  Other translations are thus:

“I live by faith in the Son of God” (NKJV, NASU, NIV, ESV, NASB)

“in the faith I live of the Son of God” (YLT)

This verse is one which advocates of salvation by faith alone refer to in support of their doctrine.  Most of the most popular modern translations render this as “by faith” and it is understood by many that faith as a mere mental belief apart from any role of physical effort is what is meant here.  However, the original language does not appear to support this view, rather it points to a system of faith in Christ which includes the faith response of the believer as well as the mental belief of the facts. 

This faith response includes the crucifixion of oneself with Christ which starts with one’s initial baptism into Christ and the putting to death of one’s fleshly desires which in a word is summed up as repentance.  In order to live in the faith, there must by necessity be a response which is a conscious decision and a commitment to follow after and serve Christ obediently and faithfully. 

Galatians 2:21
I do not make void the grace of God: for if righteousness is through the law, then Christ died for nought.

Paul’s use of the word “grace” here is representative of all that the Godhood did in the redemption of mankind under the system of faith which is in Christ.  Paul is making a point here that to reject the system of faith under which we live today is to completely devalue the grace of God in one’s life.  In Galatians 5:4, Paul later reinforced his thought on this when he wrote, “You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace” (NKJV).  Appealing to the law Moses for justification is the same thing as rejecting the system of faith under which Christians now live and voids the grace of God in a Christian’s life and bears the consequence of falling from that grace. 

The modern Calvinistic doctrine of Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS) teaches that a Christian cannot so sin as to lose their salvation. Paul’s letter is addressed to the churches of Galatia, therefore his readership is entirely Christian.  Also notice Paul’s use of the personal pronoun by referring to himself.  Paul  was a Christian writing to Christians and he declared that to seek justification through the law of Moses was to nullify the grace of God.  One of Calvinism’s foundational TULIP doctrine is the Perseverance of the Saints.  If such a thing were true, then Paul could not have nullified the grace of God, neither could the Galatian Christians to whom Paul addressed this letter fall from it.   

“for if righteousness is through the law, then Christ died for nought.“

The important application to make from this is that if it were possible to be justified through the law of Moses then there was no reason for Christ to have died on the cross.  Why would one of the members of the Godhead subject himself to the pain and humiliation of the cross if it were not necessary.  No one comes to the Father but by Christ Jesus (John 14:6), this includes those who lived under the law of Moses.  The blood of Christ was necessary in order to forgive the transgressions committed under the old law, (Hebrews 9:15).  Therefore, we can conclude that the Judaizers were trying to bind a law on the Gentile Christians which would never have the power to save them. 

The inability of the old law to justify mankind is well illustrated in scripture.  Acts 13:39 reads, “and by him [Jesus] every one that believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses” (ASV).  Other passages which further teach this fact are found in Acts 4:11-12, Hebrews 10:1-4, 1 Peter 1:18-25.

Paul’s use of the term “the law” in this verse is restricted entirely to the law of Moses.  Many today who try to support the doctrine of salvation by faith alone expand the scope of Paul’s intended meaning here to include the law of Christ under the new covenant.  The purpose for this is to eliminate the necessity for obedience to the will of God under the new covenant.  Such an abuse of scripture is an unconscionable perversion of what Paul was teaching to the Galatian Christians.  If it were unnecessary to keep God’s law under the new covenant, then it would not be necessary to obey any of it whatsoever.  One cannot set aside the law of God and then be constrained to selectively obey it.  It is part of God’s law under the new covenant to believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God (John 3:18).  No one who advocates salvation apart from new testament law is going to try and set forth the idea that one does not have to believe in Jesus.  Believing is an act of obedience to God’s law under the new covenant that every one who claims Christ as their savior is going to insist on.  Advocates of salvation apart from keeping God’s law under the new covenant are inconsistent in their requirements for salvation.  They require the keeping of one of God’s new testament laws and deny the keeping of other parts of it as it pertains to other areas of their lives.  Christians are not permitted to selectively obey God. 

Galatians 2 Paraphrase

Later, after an interval of fourteen years, I again went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas and Titus.  I went up in obedience to a revelation of God’s will and I fully revealed to them the Gospel which I proclaim among the Gentiles.  I met the leaders of the church privately to discuss this with them because I was worried that all the work I was doing and had done would be for nothing. 

My companion Titus, even though he is Greek, was not forced by them to be circumcised.  There was danger of this through the false brethren who were secretly brought in by others.  Pretending to be Christians, they snuck into where we were meeting because they wanted to spy on us in order to find a way to bring us all back under the bondage of the Law of Moses.  We refused to give in to their demands, not even for an hour, in order that the truth of the Gospel might continue with you.

From the spiritual leaders in Jerusalem, I learned nothing different from what I had been preaching. Whether they were men of importance or not, mattered nothing to me for God shows personal favoritism to no man.  In any event the leaders there imparted nothing new to the gospel I have preached to you.

In fact, when they saw that I was entrusted with the preaching of the true Gospel to the Gentiles as Peter had been to the Jews, (for Christ who had been at work within Peter for his Apostleship to the Jews had also been at work within me for my Apostleship to the Gentiles).  So when James, Cephas, and John, who were recognized as great spiritual leaders in the church, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave Barnabas and I the right hand of fellowship and agreed that we should continue to go to the Gentiles and they to the Jews.   They urged us to remember the poor, which I was already diligent to do.

Now when Peter had come from Jerusalem to Antioch, I confronted him face to face because he transgressed God’s will and was standing in condemnation for it.  Peter had been eating with the Gentiles until some of the Judaizers came there from James in Jerusalem.  But when these Judaizers arrived in Antioch he withdrew from the Gentiles and separated himself from them because he was afraid of them.  And then when the other Jewish Christians saw Peter’s defection, they joined in with Peter’s hypocrisy to the point that even Barnabas was influenced and joined with them. 

But when I saw that they were not straightforward about this according to the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, “You are a Jew who is living like a Gentile, and not living as a Jew who follows the Law of Moses, so why are you compelling your Gentile brethren to do so? We who are of the Jewish nation who are Christians, and are not born “sinners,” as we call those who are not Jews know that no man is justified by the works of the law of Moses, but through the system of the faith in Jesus Christ.  We believed on Christ Jesus that we might be justified by the faith which is in Christ and not by the works of the law of Moses, because by the works of the law of Moses, no man today shall be justified. 

As we seek to be declared just before God through our union with Christ we have learned that we Jews are alien sinners as much as the Gentiles.  Does this mean that Jesus Christ is promoting or acceptant of sin?  Absolutely not.  For if I were to try and rebuild the Mosaic system of law that I have been tearing down, then I would convict myself to be a transgressor of that law which foretold its own end through Christ.  It was through the teachings of the law of Moses that I rejected it so that I could live my life to God. 

I have been put to death with Christ and now it is no longer I that rule over my life, but Christ who is alive in me.  So the life I am living now is lived in the system of faith which is found only in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up on the cross for me.  I do not render null and void the grace of God, for if it were possible to be declared righteous through keeping the law of Moses, then it was not necessary for Christ to have been crucified and He died for nothing.

Posted in David Hersey | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Galatians Chapter 2

Friend

Webster’s Dictionary defines a friend as,  “One who is attached to another by affection; one who entertains for another sentiments of esteem, respect and affection, which lead him to desire his company, and to seek to promote his happiness and prosperity.” A friend seeks to promote our happiness and prosperity – in other words they desire and seek the best for us in all things. Solomon wrote several great proverbs dealing with friendship. “A friend loveth at all times, and a brother is born for adversity.” (Pro. 17:17) “Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.” (Pro. 27:17) A friend is loyal to you, wants the best for you and acts accordingly. A true friend wants to help you grow as a person and, more importantly, to help you grow spiritually.

What happens when our “friends” do not act toward as a true friend should? When they do not seek our best interest, and, when instead of helping us to grow spiritually and personally, they become a hindrance or an occasion to stumble for us. People like this are not our friends. In the following passage, Jesus spoke of removing anything that might come between us and God. “And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.” (Mat. 5:29-30) The same rule would apply, “if thy best friend offend thee…” Offend here means to cause to sin or to tempt to sin. If your friend is tempting you to sin and will not stop, cut him off, pluck him out and cast him from you.

You would be better off having no friends at all than surrounding yourself with those who would willfully tempt or encourage you to commit sin. “Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.” (1 Cor.15:33).The perfect example of how to deal with our “friend” who would tempt us to sin is seen in Mat. 16. Peter has just made his great confession that Jesus is “the Christ, the Son of the Living God.” (Mat. 16:16).Next, Jesus began to teach His disciples that he had come to do the will of the Fatherland be crucified. He would have sinned had he not done the Father’s will. Yet his friend Peter tempted him in trying to prevent it “Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.” (Mat. 16:22-23) Jesus literally told Peter “get thee behind me adversary…” (the Greek word “satanas” simply means “one who opposes another in purpose or act” Thayer’s), “…thou art an offense to me…” (literally a cause to stumble.)After this Peter no longer was a cause of offense to Jesus – so the relationship was allowed to continue.

Our lesson from this ought to be that we should tell those who cause us to stumble to get away from us or to stop tempting us tocsin. If they refuse to do that, then they do not have our best interest at heart and are not really a true friend to us. They are therefore become our “satanas” from whom we must depart. Not only must we choose our friends wisely and depart from those who would cause us to sin, but we must also strive to be a true, loyal friend. “A man that hath friends must shew himself friendly: and there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother.” (Pro. 18:24). We should be a friend such Jonathan was to David. “And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul. And Saul took him that day, and would let him go no more home to his father’s house. Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul.” (1 Sam. 18:1-3). And as such a friend as David was to Jonathan. “I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women…” (2Sam. 1:26)

This last passage in NO WAY implies that there was anything between David and Jonathan besides platonic friendship and brotherly love. In ancient times, women were seen as inferior; therefore brotherly friendships between men were viewed as more fulfilling than a relationship with a woman, even one’s own wife.

Posted in Jack McNiel | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Friend

ABC’s of Water Baptism

The subject of water baptism is such a contentious subject in the religious world. Contrary to popular belief, Paul had this baptism in mind in Ephesians 4:5 as a foundational pillar of our Christian faith. Nevertheless, the Biblical subject is so fundamental to a New Testament Christian, it is as simple as A-B-C.

Water baptism is the means of APPROPRIATING the grace of God. While it is completely true that the grace of God is the source of our salvation (Eph. 2:8), such salvation is conditional upon the obedience of our faith. Included in such are the clear words of our Lord and Savior just prior to His ascension: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16). While these words were still ringing in the ears of His apostles and the thought still fresh in their minds, it is no wonder that Peter declared to the Jews on Pentecost, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38), to which about three thousand souls complied (Acts 2:41). Therefore, salvation is equal with one gaining remission of sins, which makes the message of Jesus and His apostle, Peter, to be consistent. Again, contrary to the denominational word, the preposition “for” preceding the statement “the remission of sins” does not mean “because of,” but it rather means “in order to receive; unto, into,” to which many Greek theologians agree. Since the blood of Jesus is the instrument of cleansing (Matt. 26:28; Rev. 1:5), no one in any right mind would allude to the element of water cleansing the soul, but knowledgeable Bible students understand that water baptism places one in the blood of Christ; hence, Ananias told Saul, “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). To clarify even further, Peter explains that the element of water in baptism is not for physical cleansing but for spiritual cleansing:

Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. [1 Pet. 3:20-21]

God proclaims consistently throughout the New Testament that water baptism is the means of one entering the kingdom of God (John 3:5 – “born of water”) and appropriating the saving grace and mercy of God (Eph. 5:25-27 – “washing of water”; Titus 3:4-7 – “washing of regeneration”).

Water baptism is a BURIAL. Multiple passages are conclusive to this fact, supporting immersion (as opposed to sprinkling or pouring) as the proper method of water baptism. Paul says to the Christians in Rome, “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4), and also told the Colossians, “Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead” (Col. 2:12). In addition, God offers written, inspired illustrations of such in Acts 8:36-39 (“and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water”) and John 3:23 (the baptism of John in the Jordan required “much water”).

Water baptism is a COMMAND. One major problem with correctly understanding water baptism is that the denominational world confuses such with Holy Spirit baptism. The problem is easy to alleviate whenever one understands that Holy Spirit baptism was never a command, but a specific promise (cf. Acts 1:4-8). On the other hand, water baptism is a command for every believer in Jesus. After Peter taught Cornelius and those gathered with them, “…he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord” (Acts 10:48).

Thus, with this simple outline, one can properly understand the New Testament doctrine of water baptism. If you have not been baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost for the remission of your sins, why not be baptized today? If you have, would you find someone to share this message?

Posted in Sam Willcut | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on ABC’s of Water Baptism

Galatians 1

Galatians 1

Apostolic Address and Greeting (Gal 1:1-5)

Galatians 1:1
“Paul, an apostle (not from men, neither through man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead),“

False teachers were at work in the Lord’s church.  Certain Jewish Christians were sneaking around behind Paul and subverting his teachings by attacking his validity as an Apostle based on the fact that he was not an eyewitness of Jesus during his earthly ministry.  Jesus did appear to Paul on his trip to Damascus on the day of his conversion, nevertheless, Paul’s opponents were neglecting that fact and using whatever means they could to discredit him in the eyes of the members of the congregations he was working with. 

With this said, Paul begins his letter by immediately declaring who he is and stating his position as an apostle if Christ.  He then goes on to say that his appointment was not from men, nor through men in any way.  His position as an apostle came directly through Jesus Christ and God the Father.  Paul’s authority to write this epistle came from the highest source and he wanted his readership to understand that immediately.  And as an apostle acting under the authority of Jesus Christ and God the Father, what he was about to communicate to them was the word of God and coming directly from the top.  He was not acting under the authority of men, nor did his gospel come from men, including the original twelve apostles.  Paul’s teaching was coming directly from the head of all authority and he wanted to make sure his readership understood that first.

Galatians 1:2
“and all the brethren that are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:”

Paul’s reference to the brethren who were with me was probably meant to convey the assurance that Paul was not just a lone voice out there crying in the wilderness with no approval.  While himself an apostle and speaking under the direct authority of Jesus Christ, it still serves to reinforce one’s position when it is known by the readership that there are other Christians who put their stamp of approval on it.  Paul’s reference to the brethren who were with him infers their support of his epistle. 

“unto the churches of Galatia“

The recipients of this letter were all the Christians in all the congregations that were in the Roman province of Galatia.  At the time of this writing this included all of the original Galatia and including parts of Paphlagonia, Pontus, Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia, and Isauria.  Some of the Galatian congregations are mentioned in scripture being Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe.  It is not known with any certainty exactly how many congregations there were not the identities of them all, but Luke made mention of the extent of Paul’s missionary work in Galatia in Acts 18:23, “And after he [Paul] had spent some time there, he departed, and went over all the country of Galatia and Phrygia in order, strengthening all the disciples.”  Paul’s evangelical work in Galatia was if a considerable scope. 

In view of the scale of Paul’s work in Galatia, it can be inferred that the addressing of this epistle to all of the congregations in Galatia is an indicator of just how broad the scope of the Judaizing influence really was.  The crisis threatening the church was not in any way confined to a small number of Christians.  This problem was far reaching and was affecting a considerable number of Christians.  Left unchecked, this Judaizing movement threatened the very existence of the Lord’s church on a world wide scale. 

Galatians 1:3
“Grace to you and peace from God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ,“

It was customary for Paul to pray for God’s favor to be extended to his readership.  This was expression of kindness on the part of Paul and served to comfort his readership with the reassurance of God’s grace.  Grace is sometimes defined as God’s beneficial disposition towards man.  Grace is a comprehensive Biblical term which represents all that God did in reaching down to fallen man with an alternative to the condemnation man faced because of his sin.  Man did nothing to deserve God’s grace, can never earn it and can never repay the cost God incurred as a result of His grace.  The personal cost to God was quite simply more than man can hope to repay.  God’s grace is given freely and flows from His vast capacity for love and mercy. 

God’s grace is also one of the most misunderstood results of God’s loving and merciful nature.  It is supposed by many in the religious world claiming Christ as savior that the fact that God’s grace can not be earned, payed for, nor deserved releases man from the obligation to obey God’s will.  If God’s grace were not conditional upon obedience to His will, then every person who ever lived on the face of the earth would be saved whether a believer or not and Paul completely wasted his time in even writing this epistle.  If there were no conditions attached to the reception of God’s grace, then the churches in Galatia were in no danger from the Judaizers and the Judaizers were in no danger either which is abundantly denied by the inspired words of the beloved apostle Paul in this very epistle.  Paul flatly stated in Galatians 5:4 that those who sought justification through the law, meaning the law of Moses, fall from grace.  The Hebrew writer instructed his readership to be diligent lest they “fail of the grace of God“.  If God’s grace were not conditional, it would not be possible to fall from or fail of it and any warning against such a thing would be nonsense.   

“peace from God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ“

The Greek word rendered “peace” (eirënë) is the equivalent of the Heb. shalom, a greeting exchanged by Jewish people from of old. Shalom stands for well-being, wholeness and prosperity in every realm of life.  Paul extends his hope of peace from God the Father and Jesus Christ.  Peace with God is recognized as being synonymous with fellowship with Him.  Those who are in Christ and walking in the light (living faithfully) are not in rebellion to God and therefore at peace with Him.  It is Paul’s earnest wish for God’s peace to be with the churches of Galatia. 

Galatians 1:4
“who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us out of this present evil world, according to the will of our God and Father:“

Jesus being quoted here in John 10:11, “I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd layeth down his life for the sheep“.  The fact that Jesus gave his life as a willing sacrifice in order to pay the penalty of death for our sin is the single most important event in the entire plan of redemption.  Without that sacrifice, no man has any hope whatsoever for reconciliation to God.  It is our sin which separated us from God (Isaiah 59:2).  God is absolutely just (Isaiah 45:21), and his righteous nature demands a just penalty for our transgressions against Him.  The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), there is no other penalty, there is no less penalty than death.  Since our sin renders our lives forfeit, our lives are worthless as a sacrifice, even if we were to repent and live our lives perfectly.  Jesus, who was innocent, willingly sacrificed His life to pay the penalty we owe for our own transgressions.  He offered His life for ours, thereby paying our sin debt. 

Jesus taught this during His earthly ministry, (Matthew 20:28; 26:28, Mark 10:45, Luke 22:19, John 10:11; 10:17-18).

And this fact was testified of by the inspired writers (Romans 4:25, Galatians 2:20, Ephesians 5:2, 1 Timothy 2:6, Titus 2:14, Hebrews 9:14, 1 Peter 2:24; 3:18, 1 John 2:2; 3:16, Revelation 1:5).

Of significance here is the fact that Paul made this sacrifice a personal thing in Galatians 2:20 when he penned the words “and gave himself up for me“.  The sacrifice offered by Jesus was indeed for all of mankind, but it was also for each individual as well.  And when we consider the enormity of Christ’s sacrifice we must keep in mind that while the scope of His sacrifice was as big an human kind, it was also as specific to each and every one of us.  Christ died to save mankind and we must never lose sight of the magnitude of that sacrifice.  Christ also died to save each and every one of us and we must never lose sight of the fact that He died for each one of us specifically.  His death for us was personal, His sacrifice for us was personal, and our sin made it necessary for Him to die if we are to have a hope of reconciliation to God the Father. Christ died for Paul.  He died for the serial killer and the rapist.  He died for the rich and poor alike.  He died for you and He died for me.  It was our sin that put Him on the cross.  We are as responsible for the death of Christ as those who screamed “crucify Him” the night of His murder.  We are as individually responsible for His death as the ones who spat on Him and mocked Him.  We are as guilty of His murder as those who drove the spikes through Him into that cross.  

And it is a gracious and loving God who accepted the death of His Son at the hands of man for the sins of man.  Likewise it is a merciful, gracious and loving God who accepted the death of His innocent Son at the hands of each one of us in order to pay the penalty we owe.  We sinned and incurred the penalty of death.  Jesus who knew no sin died at our hands and God accepted that sacrifice as payment for our transgression.   When we as individual Christians come to the realization that it for us personally that Christ died, we are on the path to understanding the awfulness of sin and the overwhelming love it took for Jesus to do what He did on that cross.  Paul understood it and made that distinction when he made it personal.  2 Corinthians 9:15, “Thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift.”

“according to the will of our God and Father”

Paul makes sure his readership understands that God the Father is the one who is the supreme authority in the affairs of the Godhood.  It is recorded that Jesus Christ is in authority over all things to the church (Ephesians 1:22), and over all the earthly powers (Colossians 1:16-17) as well.  Jesus Christ’s authority is supreme, both in Heaven and on Earth (Matthew 28:18) but God the Father is the head over Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 11:3).  Therefore all things are according to the will of God the Father through Jesus Christ who Himself is God (Acts 20:27).   

Galatians 1:5
“to whom (be) the glory for ever and ever. Amen.“

To God be the Glory from everlasting to everlasting.  And He is worthy of the glory.  We serve a God who is absolutely just, right and fair.  He is holy, incapable of sin, incapable of being tempted, incapable of failure.  He is omnipotent, and omniscient and last but certainly not least, He is love indescribable. 

God’s absolutely just nature demands punishment for sin and only one punishment.  The wages of sin is death.  There is no partiality with God when it comes to sin. 

God’s absolutely merciful nature compelled Him to take pity on fallen man.  God wanted to provide man with a way to be forgiven but God’s absolutely just nature would not allow Him to forgive man’s sin without the penalty.  The penalty of death is owed for sin, therefore the penalty of death had to be paid.  So God, wanting to be merciful and give man a chance to be forgiven, came up with a plan where He would pay that penalty Himself.  This was accomplished by one of the members of the Godhead taking on the form of man and coming to earth to live as a man.  He gave up His heavenly abode and willingly came down here to live with sinful man.  In the end, He was rejected and murdered and God the Father accepted the murder of His Son at the hands of men as the penalty all mankind owed for sin.  That single sacrifice of God the Christ is the single most important event in all of man’s history.  That willing sacrifice came about as a result of God’s enormous capacity for love and mercy.  Without that selfless sacrifice, all mankind from Adam until the end would be doomed to everlasting separation from God. 

God did not have to do this.  He would have been well within His rights to have simply let mankind perish.  Mankind did nothing to deserve God’s gracious offer of redemption, cannot earn it and certainly cannot pay for it in any way.  God could have simply washed His hands of the whole affair and left mankind to his well deserved fate.  But God did not do that, rather, God sacrificed of Himself so that man could have a chance for redemption. 

God deserves and is worthy of our respect, our honor and our reverence.   He is deserving of glory for what He accomplished for our behalf.  Even though we live forever in His presence and hail his glory throughout eternity we will never have honored Him sufficiently for what He did for us.  And on the other side, those who fail of His grace, even though they endure the fiery condemnation of Hell for all eternity, they will never, with their suffering fully pay the just penalty for their sin.  God deserves our best, both in the life and the one to come.  He is worthy of our highest esteem and honor.  Let us glorify Him with our obedient service and praise.  Paul rightly puts the honor and glory where it is due. 

Paul’s Vigorous Rebuke Because of Their Apostasy (Gal 1:6-10).

Galatians 1:6
“I marvel that ye are so quickly removing from him that called you in the grace of Christ unto a different gospel“

Paul wastes no time in getting to the point of his epistle.  He is distressed and astounded at the ease of the apostasy of the Galatian Christians.  It is obvious that Paul has been informed of it while away from the area and chose to write them a letter about it.  Judaizers intent on binding the old law on Christian converts had been going behind Paul’s back and teaching the Gentiles that it was necessary for them to be identified as a Jew first in order to be a Christian.  They felt that the way to Christ was only through the Jews and that Gentiles had to undergo the steps of proselytization before becoming a Christian.  Circumcision was the outward provable mark of Jewish identity so it was this which was used to refer to the conversion process of Gentile to Jew.  There were more requirements than just circumcision, but this term was used to represent all of what the Judaizers were requiring of the Gentile converts.

When one considers the political and social state of a Gentile convert to Christianity, it is easy to surmise why they would be quick to accept such a thing.  People of Jewish descent had a nationality with which to associate themselves.  They had a support group so to speak.  Gentiles who became Christians were ostracized from society and rejected by the Jewish Christians at large.  It would be the equivalent today of a black family in a predominantly white congregation who did not have the support, encouragement and fellowship of their white brethren and found themselves rejected by their own nationality because of their faith.  The Gentile Christians were the victims of racial prejudice and were struggling for their place in God’s kingdom.  They had no support or place in a pagan, worldly society because of their faith and no support from the Jews who were recognized as the bloodline from whom Jesus, the Messiah came.  Jesus Christ was a Jew. The Gospel was carried to the Jews first, therefore the Jews felt like they had exclusive rights to Jesus and that it was under their supervision and control how a Gentile came to their Messiah. 

 “removing from him that called you”

Removed from God who called them (2 Thessalonians 2:13-14).  The significance of this statement cannot be over emphasized.  Paul is soon going to pronounce a curse on those who would pervert the gospel of Christ but here is the consequence to the one who would fall for such false teaching.  This statement here is the equivalent of being removed from God. 

Through Christ, all Christians are reconciled to God (Romans 5:10) and have fellowship with Him (1 John 1:3).  To be removed from “him that called you” is to forfeit reconciliation and lose fellowship with God.  There can be no worse fate than this for the Christian. 

There is a doctrine in the denominational world that teaches that once one is saved, they cannot so sin that it is possible to lose their salvation.  This doctrine is better known as ‘Once Saved, Always Saved’.  Proponents of this doctrine need to answer the question on how one could lose one’s reconciliation and fellowship with God and yet remain in a position where they can inherit eternal life with God the Father in heaven.  This is not the only statement in this epistle that strikes at the heart of this doctrine, but it is significant that it occurs in the first sentence following Paul’s introduction. 

This statement was obviously meant to help set the tone in the minds of the readers as to the seriousness of the situation that was before them.  Being removed from Him who called you is a ‘snap to attention’ type statement aimed at focusing the attention of the readers upon the personal consequences they faced.

“unto a different gospel“

The gospel being preached by these apostates was not the gospel Paul preached to them.  It was a different gospel.  We will see very soon that God’s curse is in store for those who would change the gospel from what it originally was.  The application for us today is that any gospel which is more or less than the gospel of Christ is a gospel other than the one delivered originally and that Christians are responsible for making sure they are adherents of the right one. 

Galatians 1:7
“which is not another (gospel) only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.”

Paul’s wording here means that this “different gospel” is not “another gospel“.  There is no such thing as another valid gospel.

“only there are some that trouble you”

These are the apostate Judaizers who are going behind Paul and teaching Gentile Christians that Paul is wrong, and that they are not Christians unless they observe the parts of the law of Moses which identifies them as Jews in order to be a real Christian.  These apostates were calling into question the Gentiles conversions to Christ, thus eroding the faith they had through the teachings of Paul.

The Galatians were troubled because of the false doctrine they were being led to believe.  False teachers bring great trouble to those who accept their erroneous teachings.  Their victims may not even be aware of the danger they are in until it is too late. 

“and would pervert the gospel of Christ”

Any departure from the gospel of Christ is a perversion of it.  Whether adding the commandments of men such as the Judaizers here were doing, or taking away from it, making it incomplete.  The application for us today is that the gospel of Christ can be perverted.  And when we look out into the denominational world we have today which is saturated with all kinds of different gospels, we can see that such is indeed the case.

The warnings and curses which Paul places on both those who would change the gospel and those who accept and follow after these perversions should be adequate.  Sadly this is not the case.  Division, perversion and distortion of the gospel of Christ continues even in the face of sound Biblical warnings against it. 

Galatians 1:8
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema.”

The churches in Galatia had already been preached the gospel.  The congregations, however many there were, had already been established and were serving the Lord.  Paul is authenticating the original gospel that had been preached by himself and others laboring with him.  And if anyone of them preaches one that is different, more than or less than the original, then they are “anathema“.  The KJV translates this as “cursed“.  The word “anathema” is a transliteration of the original Greek word and it carries the meaning of being condemned and rejected or thrust out by God.  The NIV translates this as “eternally condemned“. 

Paul emphasized his point here by writing that even an angel preaching another gospel would be accursed.  Angels hold a special status in the minds of God’s children.  They filled a role in the mediation of the old law (Acts 7:53, Hebrews 2:1-2, Galatians 3:19) and are thus recognized as holy messengers of God.  Paul is making the point that not even an angel has the authority to change anything in the gospel from that which they first heard from him.  The gospel they received from him at the beginning was the authentic one.  And anyone changing that in any way, even if it were an angel from heaven, will be anathema, cursed, thrust out, eternally condemned. 

It is important to keep in mind here that the apostates who were teaching this different gospel considered themselves Christians.  They were Jewish converts to Christ who were trying to bind tenants of the Mosaic law on their Gentile brethren.  These apostates were believers in Christ to a degree.  They believed in Christ as the Messiah and the Son of God.  They had faith in who Christ was, but their faith did not lead them to lay aside the traditions of the old law and follow after the true gospel of Christ.  Paul pronounced the curse of God upon them for their error. 

The doctrine of salvation by faith alone cannot stand up to a critical textual examination of the book of Galatians.  If Salvation were available by faith alone then these apostates would have been in no danger, yet this is not the case.  They were cursed by God and it is recorded for us by inspiration of the Holy Spirit through the writing of Paul.  Salvation is either by faith alone or it is not.  There is no middle ground on this.  If anything in addition to faith is necessary in order escape eternal condemnation, then salvation is not by faith alone.  Preaching another gospel causes one to be condemned, therefore it is necessary to teach the one true, authentic and original gospel to be saved.  It is important that students of God’s word think the outcomes of their conclusions out to their logical results.  If there are any accountable acts in addition to belief which one may engage in which are either necessary for salvation, or will result in condemnation, then salvation cannot be by faith alone.  The conclusion is that faith must be perfected by obedience to the will of God in order to be a saving faith.  Faith alone cannot save. 

Another prevalent doctrine which this verse defeats is the doctrine of OSAS (Once Saved Always Saved).  This doctrine states that once one converts and becomes a Christian, they can never so sin as to lose their salvation.  If this doctrine were true, Judaizing teachers who had come to Christ initially would not be rejected or thrust out by God.  Proponents of the OSAS doctrine almost universally believe in salvation by faith alone.  Their argument would be that these Judaizers were never saved in the first place.  If this were true, then as believers in Christ they were not saved by faith alone.  They were believers in Christ to a degree, but their faith was not perfected/completed by works of obedience (James 2:22), and therefore dead (James 2:20; 26).

Galatians 1:9
“As we have said before, so say I now again, if any man preacheth unto you any gospel other than that which ye received, let him be anathema.“

It is exceedingly important to take notice of Paul’s usage of the words “As we have said“.  This epistle is likely not the first time these congregations have heard of this pronouncement of condemnation for these apostate teachers and their unholy doctrine.  Paul is reiterating the former statement with the reminder that they had been told this before and to emphasize the importance of it. 

Paul is using very strong language here in his condemnation of these apostates.  Similar strong language regarding another group of apostates in the first century is used by Jude in his epistle and also Peter in chapter 2 of his second epistle.  Peter prophesied of an apostasy to come while Jude was dealing with one head on. 

Some of the strongest words of condemnation in all the Bible are used by the inspired writers when handling apostasy.  God exhibits no tolerance whatsoever for this kind of behavior in the inspired record.  We today can be assured God’s attitude toward this has not changed.  There is no indication whatsoever that God’s intolerance of this has in any way altered.  When we look out into the so called religious world today, we see thousands of groups of people claiming Christ as their savior and each teaching a variant form of the gospel of Christ.  There is no reason to believe that God’s displeasure over the activities of false teachers in the first century has in any way diminished.  Rather, there is every reason to believe that it has not changed and that many many people who call on the name of the Lord to a degree will be disappointed at their judgment.  The importance of this cannot be overstated.  It is vitally important that those who wish to be children of God teach and obey only the gospel delivered in the first century.  The only way to accomplish this is to reject all manmade creeds, catechisms and teachings of men (Mark 7:7), and turn to the holy scriptures as the only source of authority for what we do and teach, adding nothing to and taking nothing away, ordering our lives according to what is written and striving to be and live only as God would have us live. 

Galatians 1:10
“For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? or am I striving to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ.“

The only source for any gospel other than the one originally received has to come from men.  Paul is drawing a contrast here between the wishes of men and the will of God.  The two are not in harmony.  One cannot please men and please God at the same time.  Paul is building a case here to set this different gospel the Galatians were succumbing to as something which came from man and not God. 

Jesus had some teaching regarding the serving of God or man in Matthew 6:24 where He said, “No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.”  Luke recorded a parallel account of this in Luke 16:13.  James, the brother of Jesus had some straightforward teaching on the issue Paul is dealing with as well: James 4:4, “…know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever therefore would be a friend of the world maketh himself an enemy of God“.

Paul is not concerned with pleasing men, or in modern terms, being politically correct.  Paul’s main thrust here to draw a definitive contrast between the “other gospel” being propagated by men and the one true gospel he originally taught them and is standing firm on.  Paul ends this statement by saying to please men means he cannot be a servant of Christ.  There is no middle of the road here.  Paul says he cannot set on the fence on this issue and by implication neither can anybody else either.  Those who teach or follow the commandments and doctrines of men are not the servants of Jesus Christ. 

Jesus taught in Matthew 15:9, “in vain do they worship me, Teaching (as their) doctrines the precepts of men“.  Paul wrote in Colossians 2:22, “(all which things are to perish with the using), after the precepts and doctrines of men?” And to Titus in 1:14, Paul wrote, “not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men who turn away from the truth“.

“a servant of Christ.“

The word in the original language for “servant” is “doulos (doo’-los), which has a literal meaning of a slave, or someone in a voluntary or involuntary state of subjection or subserviency.  A bond servant in the new testament times could be someone who owed a debt they were unable to pay and were therefore placed in the service to their creditor until such time that the debt is satisfied.  Paul referred to himself on other occasions as a bond servant of Christ (Romans 1:1, Titus 1:1) as well as Epaphras (Colossians 4:12).  James, Peter and Jude all three referred to themselves as bondservant or slaves of Christ in the opening line of epistles written by them (James 1:1, 2 Peter 1:1, Jude 1).

Jesus Christ took the form of a bondservant or slave when He humbled Himself, left Heaven and became like men, becoming obedient to the will of God, even to the point of His death.  Christ is pictured here as a bondservant because He voluntarily placed Himself in service until a debt was paid.  The debt Jesus Christ paid was the penalty men owed for his transgressions against God.  Jesus paid a debt for us that we are incapable of paying.  He purchased us with His blood (Ephesians 1:14, Hebrews 9:12, 1 Peter 1:18).  Paul, Peter, James, Jude and Epaphras rightfully felt they owed Jesus their lives for what He did for them.  They understood that they had sinned and deserved to die.  They understood that Jesus was innocent and they were guilty. They understood that Jesus shed His blood and died in order to pay the penalty they owed for their sin.  They understood that they owed Jesus their lives because of His free will sacrifice.  They understood that they were to offer their lives back to Him as a living sacrifice (Romans 12:1).

They understood that Jesus paid a debt they could not afford.  They understood that because of sin, their lives were forfeit and that nothing they had to offer could pay the debt.  They understood that they owed Jesus their very lives because of what He did for them.  They understood that nothing they could offer would repay the debt they owed Jesus.  So they they freely offered the only thing they had to give back to Him who gave everything for them.  Jesus took the form of bondservant for them, so in return, they took the form of a bondservant to Christ. 

A bondservant remained in service until the debt was repaid.  In our case, our very lives were forfeit; we had nothing to offer that would satisfy the debt either before or after conversion to Christianity.  There is nothing man can do to earn, deserve or merit God’s offer of salvation in any way.  This circumstance does not change after one becomes a Christian.  Christians likewise can do nothing to repay God what it cost Him to provide salvation.  Mankind did not deserve the hope we have in Christ, nor can it be earned.  Christians cannot reimburse either God the Father or God the Son for the sacrifice that was given in their behalf.  The only thing a Christian has to return back to a loving God who gave so much, is his life in service.  Since it was God who gave us life, the sacrifice of that life back to Him in service cannot repay the debt.  A Christian is only returning what was given to him in the first place.  A bondservant of Christ will serve Christ in obedience to His will.  Since salvation can never be deserved or reimbursed, the term of service is for life. 

The Divine Origin of Paul’s Gospel

Galatians 1:11-12
“For I make known to you, brethren, as touching the gospel which was preached by me, that it is not after man. For neither did I receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but (it came to me) through revelation of Jesus Christ.“

Paul is telling his readership here that the original gospel preached by him at the first did not originate with men, neither was it taught to him by men.  The Judaizers working behind Paul were trying to discredit him by telling the Gentiles that Paul had received his teaching from the other Apostles and that they had given him his commission to go forth and spread the gospel but that Paul was leaving some important things out that they had to do.  The Judaizers were telling the Gentile Christians that Paul didn’t know what he was talking about as far as conversion to Christianity is concerned and that they were not in the body of Christ after all. 

Paul is telling them that the gospel he preached was not taught to him by any man, but that he received it from Jesus Christ by direct revelation.  The Judaizers were telling them Paul was taught by men, Paul is denying that and claiming to have his information from the head of the kingdom of God Himself, Jesus Christ. 

There is a practical application for us today in this text.  The religious division today is a result of the same thing Paul was battling with in the first century with the Judaizers.  The Judaizers were trying to bind the teachings and doctrines of men on the Gentile Christians thereby departing from the faith delivered by Jesus Christ.  Today we similarly have those who advocate the teachings and doctrines of men in the church.  The result in the first century was that people were being led away from Christ.  The result of this today is no different.  The Bible teaches only one faith (Ephesians 4:4-5), yet we see many different ones.  Paul’s remedy for this was that he appealed directly to the highest authority for his source of doctrine.  Today, we have the inspired writings of men who got the gospel directly from the source.  We can go to the source through the writings of Paul and others.  We don’t need the teachings of men where they conflict with what the scriptures teach.  We can go to the scriptures to validate what men teach and we are obligated to do that very thing. 

Paul appealed directly to the source for his authority.  Today, we can appeal directly to the source for our authority.  The remedy for apostasy today is exactly the same as it was in Galatia for the readers of Paul’s letter.  Reject the teachings of men and go straight to the teachings of Jesus Christ through the inspired scriptures. 

Paul’s Former Life in Judaism (1:13-14).

Galatians 1:13
“For ye have heard of my manner of life in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and made havoc of it:“

Paul’s authenticity as an Apostle was being challenged by the Judaizers working behind him.  Paul begins his defense by laying down some initial facts that will be important in his overall defense.  Paul is going to deliver a conclusive treatise against the teachings of the Judaizers and in order to do that, he must establish himself as an authentic Apostle and independent of their influence in every way. 

Paul begins his defense by revealing some of his former life as a persecutor of the Faith he was now trying to advance.  The church was already in existence when Paul converted to the Faith and he was initially opposed to it and zealously tried to destroy it from existence.  Paul wanted his readership to know that he did not have his beginnings in the faith of Christ from other men.   

Galatians 1:14
“and I advanced in the Jews’ religion beyond many of mine own age among my countrymen, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers.“

Paul was an over-achiever concerning the law of Moses.  Scholarship places Paul’s birth in Tarsus somewhere near the year 5 AD.  He became a Pharisee in roughly 31 AD which would make him in his late twenties.  Paul is about to lay out a number of facts which will serve to establish him as a genuine Apostle of Christ.  The overall goal of this epistle is to conclusively establish the fact that the old law of Moses is set aside completely and that the law of Christ (Galatians 6:2) is the true Faith.  Paul needs to establish himself, not only as a genuine Apostle of Christ, but also as an authority on the law of Moses as well.  Paul wants his readership to know that he is an authority on both the law of Moses and the Faith of Christ so that when he sets them in opposition to one another, his readership is aware that he knows exactly what he’s talking about.  Who better to write an epistle which conclusively abolishes the old law than a former Pharisee of the Jewish faith?      

Paul’s Conversion/Calling and Its Immediate Results (1:15-17).

Galatians 1:15
“But when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me, (even) from my mother’s womb, and called me through his grace,“

Paul is continuing to build a defense of his authenticity as an apostle.  He is now pointing out to his readership that it was God who directly chose him for this purpose and not men.  Paul’s appointment as an apostle was in the mind of God before he was even born.  Similar language is used by Isaiah in 49:1, “Jehovah hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name“. 

Scripture teaches us that the entire plan of redemption for mankind was in the plan of God since before the world was even created and time began (Romans 16:25, Ephesians 1:4; 3:9; 3:11, Colossians 1:26, 2 Timothy 1:9, Titus 1:2, Revelation 13:8).  Paul’s appointment as an apostle of Christ was not a spontaneous spur of the moment decision by man or God.  Paul was preaching the gospel to them in a capacity that had been predetermined before his birth by God Himself. 

“and called me through his grace“

Paul wrote much regarding God’s grace.  Grace is defined as an undeserved beneficial disposition, or unmerited favor, towards something or someone.  In this case, God called Paul through His favor of Paul arising from a beneficial disposition towards him.  Paul had done nothing whatsoever at this point to earn God’s grace.  Rather, he had been diligently and fervently pursuing the persecution of Christians with the goal of destroying them from the face of the earth. 

God extended His grace to Paul while Paul was on his way to persecute and possibly kill Christians in Damascus.  This is a very important point in understanding God’s grace.  If salvation were available on the merits of God’s grace alone, then Paul would have been saved at the moment Jesus appeared to Him on the road to Damascus.  Paul had to first make a proper response to God’s grace before anything good for Paul would manifest itself for him. 

Advocates of salvation by grace alone through faith alone will argue that Paul had to have faith.  The immediate point to make clear is that if faith is required, salvation is not by grace alone.  The very term ‘grace alone through faith alone’ is a contradiction in terms.  These two conditions cannot coexist.  Grace is not alone if faith, or anything else is required. 

Moving on to the next issue, is faith alone.  If salvation were by faith alone, then Paul would have been saved at the moment He accepted that it was Jesus Christ who had appeared to Him.  At that meeting, Jesus identified Himself to Paul and blinded Him for emphasis.  Paul’s whole world was turned upside in a moment of time.  Paul was so upset he spent the next three days without food in Damascus (Acts 9:8-9).  It cannot be reasonably denied that Paul had faith in Jesus Christ during that period of time.  Then Ananias laid his hands on Paul (formerly Saul), and his sight was restored (Acts 22:13).  Paul had been blinded and then had his eyesight restored to its former state miraculously.  One cannot reasonably deny that Paul had faith in Jesus Christ at this time either. 

If Paul were saved by faith alone, his sins should have been forgiven at that moment in time, yet we see that Ananias gave Paul a very important instruction.  Acts 22:16, “And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on his name.”  One must ask the question, if one is saved by faith alone, why did Paul still have sins to be washed away?  The answer is he couldn’t be be saved.  Salvation is absolutely dependent upon the forgiveness of one’s sins.  Where there is no forgiveness there can be no salvation.  Paul had faith, yet before he was baptized, he still had sins to be washed away. 

The means of this forgiveness of sins was said to be obtained through baptism in the text.  Paul was instructed to be baptized and wash his sins away.  If salvation were obtainable through faith alone, then baptism nor anything else would not have been required for Paul’s sins to be washed away.   Advocates of faith alone salvation sometimes draw a connection between the washing away of Paul’s sins and “calling on His name“.  They argue that sins are washed away by calling on the name of Jesus.  That does not help their case at all, rather it contradicts it in that if salvation were obtainable through faith alone, then calling on the name of Jesus would be as unnecessary for the forgiveness of sins as baptism would be.  Salvation by faith alone is either true or false.  Salvation by faith plus anything at all cannot be by faith alone. 

Proponents of faith alone salvation must argue that Paul could have walked out of that meeting with Ananias in Damascus that day without baptism and be able to expect a home in heaven with God.  Many many years later, Paul wrote this to the Christians in Philippi.  Philippians 3:11-14, “if by any means I may attain unto the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already obtained, or am already made perfect: but I press on, if so be that I may lay hold on that for which also I was laid hold on by Christ Jesus. Brethren, I count not myself yet to have laid hold: but one thing (I do), forgetting the things which are behind, and stretching forward to the things which are before. I press on toward the goal unto the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.“

The truth is, there must be a response to God’s calling.  Paul said he was called through God’s grace. Paul had to answer that calling.  Paul had to provide a proper response.  God’s grace was extended to Paul while he was yet a sinner.  God called Paul through grace when He reached down from heaven to Paul with instructions.  Paul answered that calling and obeyed those instructions by faith.  It is by faith that anyone obeys God’s call and it is by obedience that their faith is made complete.

James 2:20-26
“But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith apart from works is barren? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, in that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar?  Thou seest that faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect; and the scripture was fulfilled which saith, And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness; and he was called the friend of God. Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith. And in like manner was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works, in that she received the messengers, and sent them out another way? For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, even so faith apart from works is dead.”

Galatians 1:16-17
“to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the Gentiles; straightway I conferred not with flesh and blood neither went I up to Jerusalem to them that were apostles before me: but I went away into Arabia; and again I returned unto Damascus.“

Paul’s adversaries had gone behind him to the Galatian churches and discredited his teaching by telling them he was not a real apostle and that what he was teaching was a perversion of the gospel he had received from the other apostles in Jerusalem.  Here he is telling his readership that God’s Son, Jesus, was revealed directly to him so that he could preach Him among them.  Paul’s mounting defense is to point out to his readership that he got his gospel straight from the highest source and he did not consult anyone else as to what he was teaching. 

He did not consult the other apostles beforehand, never even having gone to Jerusalem at the beginning of his ministry.  Paul did not receive his commission from the other apostles but was acting under the direct authority of God, thus affirming to his readership that what he had taught them was authentic.  Anything other than that, either more or less, did not come from him and was the product of man’s interjections into God’s will. 

Upon receiving his commission directly from Jesus Christ, instead of seeking out the other apostles, Paul went directly east into the land of Arabia where he began preaching the gospel to the gentiles immediately.  Paul later returned to Damascus where he converted to Christianity and preached there for a period of time. 

Paul’s purpose for revealing this information is to demonstrate that he had received his commission directly from Jesus Christ and that he was acting independently of the Jerusalem church.  His adversaries had made the claim that he was not a genuine apostle and that he was acting under the direction of the Jerusalem church and preaching a gospel that was not authentic.  The Judaizers were going behind Paul directly to the churches and interjecting their Judaizing practices into their faith system by whatever means necessary in order to achieve their ends.  A big part of their strategy hinged on their ability to discredit Paul.  If they could achieve that, the rest was a matter of simply teaching them their heresy. 

Paul’s First Visit to Jerusalem (1:18-20)


Galatians 1:18
“Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and tarried with him fifteen days.“

Up to this point, Paul had been in Damascus preaching the gospel.  Paul left Damascus under less than favorable conditions.  He was forced to flee for his life.  This corresponds with Luke’s account in Acts 9:22-26, “But Saul [Paul], increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews that dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is the Christ. And when many days were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel together to kill him:  but their plot became known to Saul. And they watched the gates also day and night that they might kill him:  but his disciples took him by night, and let him down through the wall, lowering him in a basket.  And when he was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: and they were all afraid of him, not believing that he was a disciple“.

It was three years after Paul’s conversion and he was growing very proficient at confronting the unbelieving Jews and they were going to kill him at their first opportunity.  Paul’s disciples snuck him out of Damascus and it was at this time he decided to go to Jerusalem for the first time.  Paul was known by reputation in Jerusalem as a persecutor of the church and a man to be feared.  When he tried to meet with the Christians there, they were afraid of him so Barnabas took him to the apostles and vouched for him.  Peter had a rather large house in Jerusalem and it makes sense that Paul would have stayed with him. 

Galatians 1:19
“But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother.

The accusations of the Judaizers against Paul was that he was not an apostle and that what he was teaching was delivered to him by the twelve apostles that had walked with Jesus during his ministry on earth.  Paul is building the case that he never had an opportunity to learn from them.  He was only in Jerusalem for a few days and that after three years of preaching the gospel beforehand.  And when he did come to Jerusalem for the first time he only saw Peter and James.  This James is identified as the Lord’s brother and he was not one of the original twelve so the only original apostle Paul saw in Jerusalem was Peter. 

Galatians 1:20
“Now touching the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.“

The case against Paul by the Judaizers was that he was a phony going around teaching an inaccurate gospel received under the authority of the original twelve.  Paul’s defense of himself is a direct contradiction to what the Galatian Christians had been told by the Judaizers.  Paul is reinforcing his defense by affirming in writing that the things he is writing are the truth before God.  Such a statement is not to be taken lightly.  Paul invokes the name and authority of God in the verification of his claims.  A modern day equivalent would be the addition of ‘so help me God’ to a statement.  Such is the force of the declaration Paul made here. 

In Acts 9:28-29 we get an inspired look at Paul’s activities while in Jerusalem at this time.  Paul was not setting at the feet of Peter in his house being instructed.  Paul was busy evangelizing and getting himself in trouble with the unbelieving Gentiles.  Paul was with the disciples there working, teaching and evangelizing from the start.  Paul did not come to Jerusalem to learn the gospel.  Paul already knew the gospel when he arrived there and busied himself with the disciples there in the spreading of it.  And so zealous and effective was his presentation of it that in just fifteen days, he was in danger of being killed and was escorted to Caesarea where he then set out for Tarsus, the city of his birth. 

After the Jerusalem Visit (1:21-24)

Galatians 1:21
“Then I came unto the regions of Syria and Cilicia.“

In Acts 9:30 we learn that after leaving Jerusalem under threat of death, Paul was escorted by the disciples to Caesarea where he then headed for Tarsus.  That was a journey by ship. 

Tarsus was the birthplace of Paul, and was a city in Cilicia (Acts 22:3).  When Pompey subjected Tarsus to Rome it became capital of the Roman province of Cilicia, the metropolis where the governor resided. In 66 BC, the inhabitants received Roman citizenship.  For a time, it was called Juliopolis  in order to seek the favor of and to flatter Julius Caesar.  It was in Tarsus that Cleopatra and Mark Antony met and was the scene of the great feasts they gave during the construction of their fleet in 41 BC.  Tarsus was a grand city with palaces, marketplaces, roads and bridges, baths, fountains and waterworks, a gymnasium on the banks of the Cydnus river, and a stadium. Tarsus was later eclipsed by nearby Adana, but remained important as a port and shipyard.  Present day Tarsus is part of the Adana-Mersin Metropolitan Area, the fourth-largest metropolitan area in Turkey with a population of 2.75 million. Tarsus District forms an administrative district in Mersin Province and lies in the core of the Çukurova region in the Mersin province of Turkey.

Upon leaving Jerusalem after having spent time with only one of the original apostles, Paul is making the point here that he did not seek out nor see any of the other original twelve.  He went from Jerusalem straight back to working as an evangelist elsewhere. 

Galatians 1:22
“And I was still unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ:“

Not only did Paul not spend time with any of the original twelve apostles, but he never got around to visiting any of the faithful congregations in Judaea.  The reason for this being that not only did Paul not have the opportunity to learn the gospel from Peter, he also did not have the opportunity to learn it from any of the Judean congregations as well.  Paul is laying out a complete case for his independence from the Jerusalem church.  He did not receive the gospel he was preaching from them in any way shape or form.  He is presenting the proof of this by telling them that what they had heard from the Judaizers regarding his teaching could not have been possible. 

Galatians 1:23
“but they only heard say, He that once persecuted us now preacheth the faith of which he once made havoc;“

Paul was known only by his reputation to the churches in Judaea.  He was the former nemesis of the Lord’s church who had converted and was now preaching the faith.  Paul’s use of the words “the faith” are significant in this context.  He was battling the influence of those who were teaching a perversion of the one true faith.  Paul here affirms in this sentence that there is only one faith and that those in Judaea knew that he was preaching it and only it. 

Paul’s use of the words “the faith” refer to the system of faith under which all Christians are amenable to Jesus Christ.  The faith of Christ is never just a mental assent of the facts of who He is and what He did for mankind.  Rather “the faith” is a reference to a system under which all who claim Christ as savior must live in accordance to God’s divine will.  Those who fail to obey God’s will are not faithful, therefore do not exhibit “the faith” as it is specified in scripture. 

Galatians 1:24
“and they glorified God in me.”

The Judean Christians praised and gave glory to God because of Paul’s conversion to “the faith”.  Paul’s reputation as a persecutor of the church was well known and he was feared greatly among the Christians.  What a testament to the power of the gospel it must have been to the Christians of the day when they discovered that an arch enemy of the church such as Paul converted and became one of them.  It is no wonder they glorified God, doubtless out of both profound amazement and relief.  In either event, God was glorified because of Paul’s conversion.  God is glorified among men when He is obeyed.

Galatians 1 Paraphrase

Greetings from Paul, an apostle. I was chosen to be an apostle, but not by any group or person here on earth. My commission came from Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead.  Greetings also from all those in God’s family who are with me.

To the churches in Galatia:

I pray that God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ will be gracious to you and give you peace.  Jesus gave himself for our sins to free us from this evil world we live in according to the will of God and our Father. The glory belongs to God forever and ever. Amen.

I am amazed that you are already turning away from He who called you into the grace of Christ and are following a different gospel than the one we preached among you.  This different gospel is not another valid one because there is no other.  But there are those who have come among you and have brought you great trouble because they have corrupted the true gospel. 

We preached you the only true gospel message. So if any of us, even if we were an angel from heaven, teaches you a different message, let him be eternally condemned.   I said this before. Now I am proclaiming it again; anyone who tells you another way to be saved will be eternally condemned!

Now do you think I am trying to get people to accept me? No, God is the one I am trying to please. Am I trying to please people? If I seek only to please the people with my teaching, I would not be a bond servant of Jesus Christ.  Brothers and sisters, I want to assure you that the Gospel message I taught you was not made up by anyone.  I did not get my teaching from any other person, neither did I learn it from other people. Jesus Christ himself gave His gospel  to me. He is who revealed to me what I have been teaching among you.

Now you have heard about my former life in the Jewish religion. I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy his people. I was becoming a leader in the Jewish religion and advancing faster than most other Jews my own age.  I tried harder than anyone else to follow the traditions we got from our ancestors.

But God had special plans for me even before I was born, so he graciously chose me for His purpose. He wanted me to teach the message of Jesus Christ to the non-Jewish people.  After this happened, I did not waste any time neither did I seek the advice of anyone else about it.  I did not go to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before me, instead I went away to Arabia and then back to the city of Damascus.

It was three years later when I first went to Jerusalem to meet Peter and I stayed with him only fifteen days.  While I was there, I saw none of the other apostles, only James the brother of the Lord.  You must believe what I am saying for I am telling you this by the authority and approval of God. This is exactly what happened, I am not trying to deceive you.

Then after my visit to Jerusalem, I went to Syria and Cilicia.  And still the Christians in Judea didn’t even know what I looked like.  All they knew was what people there were saying, that “our former enemy is now preaching the same system of faith he tried to destroy.”  And because of this, they gave glory to God.

Posted in David Hersey | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Galatians 1

Pharisees

Where did the Pharisees come from?

The name Pharisee is not found anywhere in the Old Testament, yet by the beginning of the New Testament, they have supreme influence among the people, hold the majority vote in the Sanhedrin and are politically powerful holding the reins of government, and ones who claimed to hold to the law of God.

Well at one point, there was a group who called themselves the Assideans which name means, “Godly men or Saints.” This name is made evident in 1 and 2 Maccabees in which they were mighty men of Israel who voluntarily devoted themselves to the law. (1 Maccabees 2:42) In addition, these Assideans were the first among the children of Israel to seek peace during the time of the religious freedom revolution lead by Judas Maccabees around 145 BC, yet, they had deceived others by nourishing the war and were seditious by which they brought no peace and many Jews were slain. (1 Maccabees 7:13-17; 2 Maccabees 14:6)

Now earlier around 444 BC, just shortly after the Babylonian captivity, the priesthood formed the center of the new religious life by which they showed reverence toward Deity again and began to practice the commands of the Lord conducted by the tribe of Levi. These priest kept themselves pure from intermarriages with heathen nations and from unclean foods, but also added temple taxes because of the Sabbath (Neh. 10:31, 32) and the Passover, Pentecost and Tabernacle festivals (Neh. 6, 8, 10). So, because of these changes, Nehemiah recorded, “the seed of Israel separated themselves from all strangers, and stood and confessed their sins, and the iniquities of their fathers. And they stood up in their place, and read in the book of the law of the LORD their God one fourth part of the day; and another fourth part they confessed, and worshipped the LORD their God.” (Neh. 9:2-3). Therefore, these priest became known as the separated ones because they had separated themselves for the service of God and continued to be conservators of their ancestral religion.

Now, looking forward to these “separated ones” in 158 BC, the high priest Alexander could not restrain himself in his commitment to God, defiled himself and willfully mingled sexually with the Gentiles (2 Maccabees 14:3). He attempted to liberate the traditions of the priest which brought about a split in the “separatists” and a new priestly party name came forth known as the Sadducees, who assumed a haughty position, stood upon their priestly dignity, cared little for the real spiritual and temporal wants of the people, but only sought their own elevation of wealth and preservation, allying themselves for this purpose with foreign nations, and embracing anti-national opinions and feelings such is that of the Roman Province because at that time, it was not an empire.

Therefore, this change in the priesthood, brought about a smaller group of united people, who stood firmly, independently of these priest, who desired to keep the law and to practice their ancestral customs; and it is this party whom the opposite section the Sadducees continued to call by name, the “Separated.” Well, the group labeled the, “Separated or Separatists,” had the appearance of piety and thorough knowledge of the law, yet, they knew very well how to affect the people and secure the popular favor (Lk. 11:43) by using women to acquire considerable political influence, which became very manifest even during the history of the Jewish dynasty. This group of separatists became known as the Pharisees which is what the name Pharisee means.

So, their was two religious groups: the Pharisees and the Sadducees (rivals), which shortly after, the Essenes, a very small group broke away making 3 schools of religion which ranged from being more moderate to more strict in their observances. But, it was the Pharisees whose influence greatly increased over the whole land (Lk. 5:17) by which they later controlled the majority of the Sanhedrin (Acts 5:34, 23:6).

Thus, the Pharisees, who were noted for their self righteousness and pride (Matt. 9:11), showed their bitterness and became very dangerous to the church and persecuted it. But while, it was the aim of Jesus to call men to the law of God itself as the supreme guide of life, the Pharisees, upon the false appearance of maintaining it intact, multiplied the littlest of their rules and discrimination to such an extent, that they hemmed in the whole life of Israel and lost sight of the original traditions. This is why Jesus called them a generation of vipers (Matt. 3:7) and were frequently rebuked by him (Matt. 12:39). The Pharisees became persistent enemies of our Lord and bitter and they could not bear his doctrine and influence among the people. And this is how the Pharisees came to be.

Posted in Robert Notgrass | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Pharisees