Galatians 3

Galatians 3

The first two chapters of the letter set forth the most relevant events of the course of Paul’s life, both as a “zealot” for the law of Moses and afterward as an apostle of Christ.  Everything in Paul’s narrative of his life thus far hinges on the fact that his conversion to Christ entailed a break with the law of Moses and an acceptance and obedience to the Gospel which is God’s purposes for all nations.  From this point onward, every former loyalty and allegiance to the law of Moses is set aside for the sake of serving Christ. 

As Paul enters now into the main doctrinal phase of his epistle, he does so with a keen awareness of the crisis in Galatia. Paul has pronounced the condemnation of God on those who had brought in the false gospel and to a degree upon those who would succumb to it.  Stronger words of condemnation are yet to come and by the end of this epistle, the Galatian Christians will be fully aware of the implications of falling back to the old law and the results that such actions will have on their faith.

The context of the letter thus far has been wholly about the Galatians return to Judaism.  There has been no evidence set forth which could reasonably be said to haves any application beyond the law of Moses.  Any attempt to broaden the scope of Paul’s teaching in regards to the law of Moses as it is opposed to the law of Christ is an abuse of the text of this letter.  Under no circumstances can we use Paul’s condemnation of the law of Moses to justify a lack of obedience to God’s law under the new covenant.  

Galatians 3:1
“O foolish Galatians, who did bewitch you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was openly set forth crucified?”

Paul is not mincing words.  This speaks to the seriousness of the situation the Galatians had gotten themselves into.  They had been deceived by the Judaizers into incorporating elements of the old law system of faith into the gospel system of faith.  Paul accused them of being foolish.  The original language literally means foolish, unintelligent or unwise. 

The Galatian Christians had been bewitched which in the original language means to be fascinated by false representation.  Paul is saying they been deceived or enticed into accepting a variant form of Judaism mixed in with their faith.  It is important to keep in mind that this group of Judaizers were of a sect of Jews who believed in Christ but were insisting that the Gentiles be circumcised and to keep the law of Moses (Acts 15:5).  This was a variant form of a belief system which was neither wholly Mosaic law or Gospel.  It was a mixture of the two, wholly contrived in the minds of men with no authority for it from scripture. 

This bewitchment of the Galatian churches is by no means the only time in the gospel age this has occurred.  Christians were being beguiled and deceived into believing and practicing lies in the first century. That is still going on today on a world wide scale.  Paul accused the Galatians of being foolish for allowing themselves to be deceived.  The application for us today is that if we allow ourselves to be deceived, we are as foolish today as they were then.  The remedy for being deceived is to be obedient to God’s will in all things.  Beguilement and deception begins when we fail to respect God’s authority and allow ourselves to decide for ourselves what we will or will not obey. 

before whose eyes Jesus Christ was openly set forth crucified?

The Judaizers had successfully managed to distract the Galatians from the crucified Christ.  The implication here is that the teaching of Jesus Christ and His crucifixion clearly teaches the fulfillment and end of the old law system of faith.  To fully understand the crucifixion of Christ is to fully understand the result this event has on the law of Moses. 

Paul’s language here demonstrates that his teaching of the crucified Christ among them had been so completely clear and so thorough that the event had been illustrated to them to the degree that it was the same as if they had been there at Christ’s death and witnessed it with their own eyes.

Depending on which translation one is using, there are different renderings of this verse.  The KJV, NKJV  and YLT include a phrase which is not found in several other translations. 

The NKJV version reads, “O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified?

The reason for this is that the manuscripts used to translate the KJV, NKJV and the YLT contain this phrase in the Greek language.  It is not within the scope of this study to delve deeply into a critical textual discussion over whether Paul’s original autograph bore this phrase or not.  Whether or not the phrase was there bears no doctrinal implications whatsoever.  Moreover, Galatians 5:7 contains this phrase in all of the manuscripts used to translate all of our modern day translations: “You ran well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth?” (NKJV).  The implication on Paul’s reference here to obeying the truth cannot be overstated.  God’s truth is to be obeyed, not just believed.  Whether or not Paul wrote it in Galatians 3:1 makes no difference because he taught it, by inspiration in chapter 5, verse 7. 

Galatians 3:2
“This only would I learn from you. Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?”

This reference to the Spirit is the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit as indicated in verse 5 of this context.  In the absence of the holy scriptures in the first century, God worked signs and wonders among the churches in order to confirm the authenticity of the word being preached by His Apostles. Hebrews 2:4 reads, “God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?”   A list of these gifts is recorded in 1 Corinthians 12:7-11 which reads, “But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all:  for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills” (NKJV).  All of these gifts were useful in edification of the body and for confirmation of the validity of the word being taught. 

The gifts of wisdom, prophecy, faith, discerning spirits and knowledge were useful in that the Bible had not been written yet and Christians were in need of instruction in God’s will.  The Holy Spirit provided a measure of that miraculously in order to assist in the proper edification of the body until the inspired writers finished recording God’s will permanently. 

The gifts of miracle working, tongues, interpretation of tongues and healing were useful in that they demonstrated the validity of the gospel through signs of power and authority.  They were never meant to be abused for profit or personal gain, but were intended to demonstrate the authenticity of God’s word and to bring glory to His name. 

The miraculous gifts were temporary, meaning that there was a time coming when they would cease. Concerning miraculous gifts, Paul reaches in 1 Corinthians 13:8-10, “Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away” (NKJV).  That which is perfect means that which is complete or that which completely reveals the will of God to man.  We understand this to be the holy scriptures in their entirety which are self authenticating and need no confirmation, and thoroughly equip us for our Christian walk (2 Timothy 3:16-17). 

The edification work of the miraculous gifts included prophecy in 1 Corinthians 12:7-11.  Concerning prophecy, it was foretold in old testament scripture that prophets would pass from the land in the time period associated with Christ on earth,  Zechariah 13:1-3
In that day a fountain shall be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness.  It shall be in that day,” says the Lord of hosts, “that I will cut off the names of the idols from the land, and they shall no longer be remembered. I will also cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to depart from the land.  It shall come to pass that if anyone still prophesies, then his father and mother who begot him will say to him, ‘You shall not live, because you have spoken lies in the name of the Lord.’ And his father and mother who begot him shall thrust him through when he prophesies” (NKJV).  The fountain opened is an apocalyptic reference to the shedding of Christ’s blood for the sins of mankind.  “In that Day” does not literally mean the day Christ died, rather it means in that general time period. 

concerning the cessations of prophecy, Paul wrote in Ephesians 4:11-13, “And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,  for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ” (NKJV).  Prophecy was given for the edification of the body until we come to the complete unity or revelation of the system of faith and of the knowledge we need of God in order to live a satisfactory life in the sight of God.  Prophecy was to end when this was achieved because it was no longer necessary.  We have the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God recorded for us in the scriptures.  Contained within the pages of the written word of God, we have what Paul said would come and bring an end to prophecy.  We have the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God.  The fact that everyone on earth does not practice it and live it according to what is written does not mean we don’t have it with us.  The miraculous spiritual gifts were temporary, having a specific purpose for an intended period of time which has come to pass.

The miraculous spiritual gifts could only be imparted by an apostle to others in order to help with the work of the gospel (Acts 8:18).  It was a customary practice during the infancy of the Lord’s church for an apostle to lay their hands on some of the Christians and pass the ability to perform these miraculous works on to various congregations of Christians (Acts 8:14-17, Acts 19:6, 2 Timothy 1:6).  This is certainly what Paul was referring to in Galatians 3:2 as evidenced in verse 5. 

What Paul wanted to know from his readership was if they received these miraculous gifts as a result of their obeying the law Moses, or by the hearing of faith.  It is important to keep the chronology of the events in mind when considering this.  Paul arrived and evangelized the Galatian churches with the Gospel of Christ which was devoid of the commandments of the law of Moses.  The Galatian churches received the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit at the hands of Paul at that time, long before the Judaizers ever showed up.  Paul was asking them this question in order to make them think.  Did the Holy Spirit come among them, working miracles as a result of what Paul taught them or as a result of what the Judaizers were teaching?  This was evident proof of the validity of Paul’s gospel and he was calling this to the minds of his readership by asking them when they received it?  Paul was appealing to their sense of logic and ability for logical thought process. 

works of the law

Paul uses a number of expressions to represent the law of Moses.  “works of the law” is a reference to the Law of Moses.  Other similar expressions by Paul in Galatians regarding the law of Moses are “flesh” (Galatians 3:3); “the law” (Galatians 3:17-19); the “works of the law” (Galatians 3:5).  All of these are expressions Paul uses in reference to the law of Moses. 

hearing of faith”

Paul also uses different expressions in his reference to our present day system of faith.  In Galatians he refers to it as “the faith” (Galatians 1:23; 3:23); obeying the truth (Galatians 5:7); or just “the truth” (Galatians 2:14); “Spirit” (Galatians 5:17-18); “the gospel” (Galatians 1:7; 1:11); and the “law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2).  Paul contrasts the the faith and the law of Moses throughout the letter of Galatians.  These expressions that Paul uses are in reference to the same thing.  There is much religious confusion over this among those who claim Christ as savior.  It is important to recognize these expressions and to know what Paul is trying to communicate.  This is achieved by a proper consideration of the immediate and remote context of the letter.  The immediate context is vitally important, but where so much error exists is in a failure to take into account the overall context of this letter which is a contrast between the law of Moses and the system of faith under which Christians live in this present age.  One cannot assign a meaning to an immediate context which contradicts the overall context of the letter.

Galatians 3:3
Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now perfected in the flesh?

Paul follows his thought provoking question from the previous verse with a stinging rebuke.  Are you so foolish as to think that after you got your beginnings in the Spirit who confirmed the authenticity of my gospel through signs and wonders, that now you want to follow after those who teach you that I was wrong and that you need to follow the law of Moses?  Paul wants to know why they would think that the Holy Spirit would send them signs and wonders to confirm what he had preached if it were not the truth.  In today’s speech, this is Paul’s way of saying ‘What are you thinking?”

Galatians 3:4
“Did ye suffer so many things in vain? if it be indeed in vain.”

Paul is reminding his readership among the churches of Galatia of the persecutions they had endured at the hands of both the Jews and the Gentiles.  Luke wrote of this persecution in Acts 14:1-7, “Now it happened in Iconium that they went together to the synagogue of the Jews, and so spoke that a great multitude both of the Jews and of the Greeks believed.  But the unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles and poisoned their minds against the brethren. Therefore they stayed there a long time, speaking boldly in the Lord, who was bearing witness to the word of His grace, granting signs and wonders to be done by their hands. But the multitude of the city was divided: part sided with the Jews, and part with the apostles. And when a violent attempt was made by both the Gentiles and Jews, with their rulers, to abuse and stone them, they became aware of it and fled to Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia, and to the surrounding region. And they were preaching the gospel there” (NKJV).

Iconium, Lystra, Derbe and the cities of Lycaonia were part of the Roman province of Galatia.  The Jews who did not believe in Christ set about to influence the Gentiles against the Christians.  Notice that both the Gentiles and the Jews were trying to kill the apostles.  When they became aware the attempt to kill them, they fled to other cities in the Roman province of Galatia and continued on with the spreading of the gospel.  What they left behind them were Galatian congregations who were living amid both Gentile and Jewish persecution. 

When Paul asked them if they suffered so many things in vain, he meant did they go through all the persecution they had endured for nothing.  Did they come through all the persecution they had faced only to throw it all away by submitting to the Judaizers?   

if it be indeed in vain

If the Galatian churches did not reject the doctrine of the Judaizers, all they suffered at the hands of the Jews and Gentiles would indeed be for nothing.  This statement by Paul here affirms that it was not too late for them.  All they had to do was to reject the doctrine of the Judaizers and return to the one gospel Paul had preached to them at the beginning and their former sufferings would not have been for nothing.  They like anybody who has strayed from the one true path can return and seek forgiveness and be restored.  This is one of the beautiful things about God’s mercy and grace.  The prodigal son can return home, the wayward disciple and return to the fold, the apostate can reject the false gospel and return to Christ at any time if they are sincere and genuinely seek God’s restoration and forgiveness. 

Galatians 3:5
He therefore that supplieth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, (doeth he it) by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

The Judaizers were bringing the Galatian Christians under the law of Moses.  Acts 14:3 demonstrates that they had received the miraculous manifestations of the Holy Spirit at the beginning before the Judaizers ever showed up on the scene.  Paul wants to know from his readership when they received the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit.  Did they receive them when they obeyed the gospel or did they receive them later on when they obeyed the Judaizers?  Did the Holy Spirit work miracles in order to confirm the gospel or did He work miracles in order to confirm their obedience to the old law? 

Paul is telling them they should be able to tell which gospel was authentic by the miraculous workings of the Holy Spirit.  Only a fool would believe the Holy Spirit had any part or involvement in the spreading or practicing of a heretical doctrine.  The Holy Spirit is not going to work any miracles in support of heresy.  Concerning this Luke writes in Acts 5:32 which reads, “And we are His witnesses to these things, and so also is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him” (NKJV).  The Galatian Christians were not obeying God, therefore the Holy Spirit was not confirming the Judaizing heresy.  The Christians in Galatia should have noticed a conspicuous lack of support from the Holy Spirit.  In fact the absence of His confirming work should have been so obvious that they realized something was amiss.  Paul’s question to them regarding this was intended bring this to their attention and cause them to think about it.  Paul wants his readership to use their abilities for rational thought, and apply a little common sense rather than to blindly follow after what the Judaizers were teaching them. 

Galatians 3:6
Even as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness.

The Judaizers were teaching the Gentiles that they could not become a Christian unless they were first a son of Abraham.  Concerning Abraham, Luke wrote in Acts 7:8, “Then He [God] gave him [Abraham] the covenant of circumcision; and so Abraham begot Isaac and circumcised him on the eighth day; and Isaac begot Jacob, and Jacob begot the twelve patriarchs” (NKJV).  Abraham was given the covenant of circumcision long before Moses received the law on Mt Sinai and the Judaizers were appealing to this covenant in order to justify their teaching that the Gentiles had to be circumcised.  Paul is aware of what the Judaizers were claiming and he is directly addressing one of the points of their justification for their heresy.

Abraham did not follow the old law, having lived several hundred years before the law of Moses was given.  Abraham was found righteous when he “believed” God.  This verse is one used by many people to support the doctrine of salvation by faith alone.  It is contended from this verse that Abraham was declared righteous by God at the moment of his belief in what God commanded him to do.  They claim that at the moment of Abraham’s mental belief, God declared him righteous without any act of obedience on his part.  The conclusion that must be drawn therefore is that Abraham could have refused to leave his home at the command of God, essentially becoming a nomad for the rest of his life and finally when put to the ultimate test could have refused to offer his son Isaac on the alter and still be found righteous in the eyes of God.  

Paul quoted from an old testament scripture in Genesis 15:6, “And he [Abraham] believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him for righteousness” (NKJV).  It is true that Abraham believed God, but if Abraham would have stopped there and made no effort to commit his actions to that belief, Abraham would not have been found righteous.  True belief in God must be accompanied with obedience.  If Abraham would have refused to obey God, then he would have been guilty of not believing God.  James wrote concerning the faith of Abraham in James 2:21-23, “Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?  Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect?  And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God” (NKJV).  Notice carefully that the scripture in Genesis 15:6 which says Abraham “believed in the Lord” was fulfilled when Abraham obeyed.  Abraham was declared righteous when his faith convicted him to action and he carried through with it.  John wrote concerning the connection between one’s actions and righteousness in 1 John 3:7, “Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous” (NKJV).  The opposite of that is found later in V10, “In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother” (NKJV).  The correct conclusion is that true faith is not just a mental exercise but a practice.  Faith saves when faith obeys and not a moment before.

Galatians 3:7
“Know therefore that they that are of faith, the same are sons of Abraham.”

The Apostates were teaching the Gentiles that they first had to become a Jew or in other words a son of Abraham before they could become a Christian.  Jewish people were the sons of Abraham by birth.  Paul is telling his Gentile brethren that through obedience to the faith they become the sons of Abraham and not through obedience to any of the law of Moses, in particular the covenant of circumcision.

Paul goes to great lengths in this epistle to establish the fact that Gentiles are the sons of God through the system of faith and not through the system of the old law.  Concerning the sonship of a Christian with Abraham, Paul drives this point home later in this very context when he writes in Galatians 3:26-29, “For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.  For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (NKJV).

Paul’s point here is that through obedience to the faith, and not through the old law, Jews and Gentiles alike are the sons of Abraham and therefore the children of God.  Paul continues to press this point as he progresses into his epistle. 

Galatians 3:8
And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand unto Abraham, (saying,) In thee shall all the nations be blessed.

Paul now goes to the most compelling evidence of all in scripture to prove that the Gentiles were under a completely new system of faith.  He turns to a prophecy of it given to Abraham.  Prophecy and fulfillment is the one thing in the inspired record that cannot be faked by mankind.  Only a timeless eternal being who is utterly separated from our linear time based existence can see forward down the path of our timeline and know what is going to take place.  There are so called prophets out there who have had some lucky guesses and try to pass themselves off as such, but with regard to God, the sheer magnitude of fulfilled prophecy in scripture and the unerring accuracy of it eliminate any doubt whatsoever as to the authenticity of it.   The level of prophecy and pinpoint accuracy in fulfillment is evident proof of the divinity of God and the authenticity of His written record.   The inspired writers of the New Testament knew this and drew upon it regularly as the proof of the gospel message. 

Paul could have chosen from any number of old testament passages which foretold the admission of the Gentiles into the family of God, but he specifically referred to the one given to Abraham as recorded first in Genesis 12:1-3, which reads, “Now the Lord had said to Abram: “Get out of your country, From your family And from your father’s house, To a land that I will show you.  I will make you a great nation; I will bless you And make your name great; And you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed” (NKJV).  And then repeated in Genesis 18:18; 22:18; 26:4 and 28:14.   Paul probably used this prophecy given to Abraham because the Judaizers were teaching them they could not be a child of God unless they were first a child of Abraham.  By using the prophecy given to Abraham concerning them, he was showing that it was given to Abraham, who was recognized as the father of the Israelite nation,  that the blessings to come through him were predestined to be available to all nations on the earth.  By drawing upon this prophecy, Paul is teaching his readership by inference that the gospel system of faith which he had originally taught them was the avenue through which all the nations of the earth would be blessed through Abraham.

Paul devotes the rest of this chapter to reinforce and summarize what he has introduced here.  The Judaizers were teaching the Gentiles that only the Jews were the sons of Abraham and that in order for them to become heirs to the gospel, they had to first become a son of Abraham through the law of Moses.  This of course included the rite of circumcision.  Paul used the prophecy given to Abraham to demonstrate that there was a time coming when all of the nations of the earth would be directly blessed through Abraham apart from the law of Moses.  Paul builds upon this for the rest of this chapter ending it with a summary statement which is a direct refutation of what the Judaizers were teaching.  Galatians 3:29, “And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (NKJV).

Galatians 3:9
“So then they that are of faith are blessed with the faithful Abraham.”

The word “So” in this context intrudes a conclusion based on the preceding text.  Paul concludes his prior thought to conclude that those who are of the faith of Christ are directly blessed with Abraham and therefore do not have to undergo any of the rites or rituals associated with first becoming a Jew in order to become a Christian.  The Judaizers were trying to put themselves between the Gentiles and access to the kingdom of Christ.  For centuries, if any Gentile wanted to become a child of God and live as a Jew they had to undergo a process in order become a proselytized Jew.  Through the centuries, the Jews came to see themselves as the only avenue through which any Gentile could come to God.  In the minds of the Judaizers it was necessary to first become a son of Abraham in order to become a child of God.  They could not accept the fact that this wall of separation had been torn down.  Paul expounded on this greatly in Ephesians 2:11-19 where he concluded with “For through Him we both [meaning Jews and Gentiles alike] have access by one Spirit to the Father. Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God” (NKJV).


The Curse of the Law of Moses

Galatians 3:10
“For as many as are of the works of the law are under a curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one who continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law, to do them.”

Paul begins this thought with the word “for” which in this context is similar to saying “because”.  Paul is using a negative comment here and the consequences are dependant upon the conditions set forth in the previous statement.  Paul’s foundational argument here is that all who are of faith are the sons of Abraham whether they are Jews or Gentiles as he stated in verse 7.  Paul then went on to add in verse 8-9  that Abraham was given a prophecy which foretold this event and because of that, all who are of the faith of Christ are blessed with Abraham.  Now in this verse, Paul introduces it with a word which essentially means ‘because’.  What Paul said in the prior few verses is an introduction to what Paul is about to say. 

Within the context of what Paul is teaching here, all who are of the faith are the sons of Abraham, and then the negative which he now introduces is a consequence which is connected with the entire thought he is trying to convey.  The consequence here is that any who try to live under the law of Moses are under a curse.  Paul quotes from Deuteronomy 27:26 to make this point, “Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them” (KJV).  Paul is teaching here that to try and follow the old law is to find oneself living under the curse pronounced in the old law that all of the old law must be kept and not just part of it.  In short, those who live under the law must do all of the old law or be cursed.   The same curse which prevailed over the Israelites who lived under the law of Moses before the coming of the Gospel likewise prevails over anyone trying to live in any way shape or form under the old law after the coming of the gospel.  The Judaizers who were trying to bind various ordinances of the old law such as circumcision on the gentiles were in effect bringing upon themselves and any who followed after their heretical doctrine the curse of having to follow all of the old law.  Paul restates this consequence in Galatians 5:3-4 in order to make sure his readership understands the ramifications, “And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace” (NKJV).

“are under a curse”

In the law of Moses we read from Leviticus 18:4-5, “You shall observe My judgments and keep My ordinances, to walk in them: I am the Lord your God. You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, which if a man does, he shall live by them: I am the Lord” (NKJV).  We have already seen from Deuteronomy 27:26 that a curse is upon those who do not do all of the law.  Therefore those living under the old law of Moses had to keep the law perfectly in order to live.  In other words, they could not sin.  Once they transgressed the law of Moses, they had failed to do all of the old law.  The old law of Moses was unable to justify or to make right someone after they had sinned.  The moment one sinned and fell short of the glory of God, there were no provisions in the law of Moses which could justify them completely.  The best the law of Moses could do at that point was to atone for that sin temporarily.  It was not possible for the law of Moses to take away sin.  Hebrews 10:4 teaches us that “it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins” (NKJV).  From the moment of their first sin, anyone living under the law of Moses was cursed.  The curse of the law of Moses was irreconcilable separation from God for sin. The only way one could live, meaning live with God in heaven, under the law of Moses is if they never sinned. 

The law of Christ has something to offer which the law of Moses could never do.  In Hebrews 10:1 we see this inability of the law illustrated, “For the law [of Moses], 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” (NKJV).  The law of Christ has the ability to make one perfect and to completely justify the faithful.  This accomplished through the blood of Christ which is something nobody living under the old law had access to.  Under the old law, a sinner was cursed.  Under the law of faith, a sinner can be forgiven and reconciled to God by the blood of Jesus Christ.  Hebrews 8:6-7, “But now He [Jesus Christ] has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second” (NKJV).

Those who live under the old law are cursed when they sin for there is no permanent and total provision for it within the law.  The old law being unable to accomplish this was faulty in that area.  Paul is trying to make his readership understand that followers of Christ could not live by, return to or in any way embrace the old law as a system by which one could live.  It makes no sense to appeal to an old abolished system under which one is cursed when there is a much better system available under which one can realize absolute and total forgiveness and reconciliation to God. 

Galatians 3:11
Now that no man is justified by the law before God, is evident: for, The righteous shall live by faith;

The law in view here is exclusively the law of Moses.  Paul is contrasting two systems of faith.  He often refers to each of them as “law” and “faith”.  This verse is often lifted entirely out of its proper context and used to support the idea that a Christian today does not have to live their life in obedience to the will of God.  Under no circumstances is Paul to be understood to be teaching that law keeping under the new covenant is in any way unnecessary.  Paul designates the present system of faith we live under to be the “law of faith” in Romans 3:27.  Later in the book of Galatians, Paul refers to the system of faith under which Christians live as the “law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2).  It makes no sense for God to give us the “law of Christ: or the “law of faith” and then teach that we can circumvent that law in any way.  Such a notion is nonsense and completely at odds with what Paul is really teaching in this context. 

“Now that no man is justified by the law before God”

The law of Moses was incapable of justifying as stated in Acts 13:39, “and by Him everyone who believes is justified from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses” (NKJV).  No one, not even the Israelites living under the law of Moses before the coming of the gospel were justified [declared right], by the law of Moses.  All the law of Moses was able to do was to atone for those sins until the blood of Christ was shed at the cross.  Hebrews 9:15 teaches us that “He [Jesus Christ], is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant [law of Moses], that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance” (NKJV).

Paul means here that no man, no matter when they lived could be justified under the law Moses.  And certainly not for those living after the cross.  The law of Moses had a purpose, but that law has passed from the scene and has been replaced by a new law.  The law we live under today is capable of justification.  It also accomplished the complete justification for all who lived under the old law.  The law we live under today is known as many things in the new testament.  Each one of its designations are designed to illustrate a particular aspect of it.

This law of Christ is often referred to as “the faith” or sometimes just “faith”.  This designation represents hope, confidence and conviction in God and His covenant with mankind which accomplishes the salvation of all who trust and obey Jesus Christ.  Hebrews 5:9 states that Christ is the author of salvation for the obedient.  “Faith” as a comprehensive Biblical term referring to the gospel is not just a mental conviction apart from action, rather, it is a system whereby the faithful can live and have a hope of eternal life in heaven. 

The law of Christ is sometimes referred to as the “gospel“.  The old law of Moses couldn’t justify us.  But the new law can justify us through the blood of Christ.  This is indeed good news and the term gospel is representative of that aspect of Christ’s law. 

The law of Christ is sometimes referred to as the new covenant.  Covenant represents the aspect of promise.  God promises to save us in exchange for our faithfulness.  This covenant has conditions which must be met in order for God to fulfill His promises. 

The designation “law of Christ” is representative of that standard of living and pattern of behavior by which a Christian must live in order to be in accordance with God’s will.  Christians cannot live just any old way they fit.  There are expectations which if not met will result in condemnation.  (1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Galatians 5:19-21). 

All of these terms are representative of one thing and are not mutually exclusive.  We do not have a law which we do not have to obey, and a totally unrelated covenant with a totally unrelated system of faith.  They are all components of the same thing and if we remove one of these components, then we get an incomplete representation.  For example, if we take only the faith aspect of it and disregard covenant and law then we have not embraced the totality of what it really is. 

“The righteous shall live by faith”

Paul is contrasting the law of Moses with the system of faith which replaced the old law.  The righteous under the new system of faith must live by it and not by the law of Moses.  We cannot mix them, we cannot pick and choose various of aspects of each and come up with our own variations which is what the Judaizers were doing.  We must choose the one and reject the other completely.  And Paul is identifying which one we must choose. 

Paul’s use of the term “faith” represents the entire system of faith under which Christians live today.  The entire theme of Paul’s letter to the Galatians so far has been contrasting two systems of faith.  There is no hint whatsoever in the overall view of the letter to suggest anything which is more or less than a contrast of the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ.  To expand anything Paul has taught in this letter to include faith verses law keeping under the new covenant is to entirely ignore the basic theme of Paul’s letter and to interject the mind of man into the text. 

Galatians 3:12
“and the law is not of faith; but, He that doeth them shall live in them.”

Paul is declaring emphatically that the old law of Moses and the new law of faith are two separate systems.  The old law of Moses is not of the new system of faith.  The two are mutually exclusive and they cannot be mixed.  Anyone who follows after either of these systems must live in the one they choose.  They cannot mix them nor can they alter either of them in any way.  The believer must make a choice, and Paul leaves nothing to the imagination here as to which one is the correct choice.  One can choose the law of Moses, and be cursed.  Or one can choose the law of Christ and be saved.  Paul’s readership is being given the facts.  It will be up to them to choose. 

Galatians 3:13
“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us; for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:”

The curse of the law Moses was irreconcilable separation from God for sin.  When mankind sins under any covenant, their lives are forfeit and the penalty is spiritual death (Romans 6:23), which is understood to be eternal separation from God.  Jesus Christ was able to redeem or buy back the souls of those who were living under the curse of the law of Moses.  He accomplished that by paying the penalty they incurred with their sin by accepting the consequences for the curse Himself.  In short, the curse of the law of Moses was death, so Christ died that death for them and thereby redeemed them.  The word redeemed carries the meaning of purchasing something back which had been leveraged by debt.  In the time of Christ this redeeming was usually in association with slavery. 

Man sins and thereby has incurred a sin debt.  The payment for that debt is death.    By becoming that curse, Jesus paid that sin debt and redeemed or bought back the soul of the sinner who owed the sin debt.  In short, Jesus Christ satisfied the debt man owed for sin with His own life so that man could have a chance of reconciliation to God.

Paul is explaining to his readership that Jesus became the curse for them in order to satisfy the curse of death for sin incurred by the law of Moses.   This is something nobody living under the law of Moses had.  Paul is trying to illustrate the vast importance of living according to the law of Christ as opposed to the law of Moses. 

The application for us today is that we also live under the law of Christ.  And it would be just as foolish for anyone living today to abandon the law of Christ and seek in any way to embrace and follow the law of Moses.  

“having become a curse for us”

Christ became a curse in order to remove the curse of the law of Moses.  The death of Jesus was that of the worst sort of criminal.  He was rejected and denounced by the Jewish leaders who influenced the people to demand His death by crucifixion (Mark 15:13-14).  The old law of Moses pronounced a curse on anyone that was hung, Deuteronomy 21:23, “for he who is hanged is accursed of God” (NKJV).  The Jewish leaders wanted Jesus to die by crucifixion because they knew the people would view Jesus as being cursed by God because of it and thereby wipe out all the remaining hope, belief or allegiance the people had in Jesus Christ as the Messiah.  Not just any death would do what the Jewish leaders wanted.  They specifically wanted Jesus hung on a tree, or on a cross so that that the people would think this man who claimed to be the Son of God was really cursed by God instead. 

Jesus Christ was forsaken by the Father during his crucifixion on the cross, Matthew 27:46, “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” (NKJV).  This rejection by God was prophesied in the old testament, Psalms 22:1, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me? Why are You so far from helping Me, And from the words of My groaning?” (NKJV).  In Isaiah we read another account of this prophecy and the resultant blessings given to mankind:

Isaiah 53:4-12
Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.
5 But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.

7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He opened not His mouth;
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
So He opened not His mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment,
And who will declare His generation?
For He was cut off from the land of the living;
For the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9 And they made His grave with the wicked–
But with the rich at His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was any deceit in His mouth.

10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,
And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand.
11 He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many,
For He shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,
And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,
Because He poured out His soul unto death,
And He was numbered with the transgressors,
And He bore the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.
NKJV

In fulfillment of prophecy, Christ bore the reproach of mankind’s sin at his crucifixion: 2 Corinthians 5:18-21, “Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, 19 that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.  20 Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God.  21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (NKJV).  See also 1 Peter 2:24, “who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness — by whose stripes you were healed” (NKJV).  We see here in Peter’s words a connection with the prophecy of Isaiah in 53:5.  Peter is teaching here that Jesus Christ was the one predicted by Isaiah so many centuries earlier. 

When Jesus Christ died on the cross, He was cursed by man and forsaken by God the Father.  He rescued mankind from the curse of the law of Moses by willingly taking on the sins of all mankind and becoming cursed Himself.  Paul is trying to communicate to his readership that those living under the old law were living under the curse of the old law.  Jesus provided a better way by taking upon Himself the curse that should have been given to mankind.  The obvious application here is that through Jesus Christ one can escape the curse of the old law.   Since through the old law, one is cursed, then it is unwise at best to seek any part of that old system of faith.  The old law of Moses is not going to get them where they need to be in regards to their salvation. 

Galatians 3:14
“that upon the Gentiles might come the blessing of Abraham in Christ Jesus; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”

Here is the fulfillment of the promise God made to Abraham recorded in Gen 18:18, “Since Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? (NKJV).  After Abraham obeyed the Lord in the offering of His only son, Isaac, God said to him in Genesis 22:17-19, “blessing I will bless you, and in multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies. 18 In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.” (NKJV)

Paul went back to the promise given to Abraham in order to show his readership that as Gentiles, they were included in God’s plan long before the law of Moses ever came about.  The blessings of Abraham were fulfilled in Christ and not through Moses. 


The Promise of Abraham

Galatians 3:15
“Brethren, I speak after the manner of men: Though it be but a man’s covenant, yet when it hath been confirmed, no one maketh it void, or addeth thereto.”

Paul is going to explain this better as he goes on with it.  A fuller reading of the context reveals that the covenant given to Abraham by God cannot be altered by man.  This covenant, once confirmed can neither be discounted nor can it be added to in any way.  God made this covenant with Abraham and nothing can change that. God confirmed His promise to Abraham as evidenced in:  Hebrews 6:13 “For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, Saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.” 

There are a number of applications we can make from this which are relevant to both the situation in Galatia and to what we see around us today among those claiming Christ as savior.  The covenant God made with Abraham was one of many covenants God has entered into throughout the history of mankind.  The thought here is that no covenant that God enters into can be altered once it has been confirmed.  The covenant between God and Abraham could not be altered, neither can the new covenant or new testament under which Paul’s readership lives.  This includes the first readers as well as those today who live under the same gospel.  No covenant of God can be dismissed or altered in any way and this includes the conditions set forth in the covenant. 

God has entered into a covenant with mankind where a plan of redemption has been provided as a means of salvation.  In this case, God is what we today refer to as the Suzerain or supreme leader and director of the covenant.  God set the conditions and entered into this covenant at His own volition and under His supreme authority.  Under this arrangement mankind has the obligation to abide by the conditions of the covenant with no exceptions.  The conditions of the covenant are non-negotiable and unalterable in any way.  This is not what we see in practice today.  We have one new testament which is God’s covenant with mankind, with one set of conditions which must be met in order to enjoy the benefits of God’s covenant with mankind.  But when we look out into the so called Christian community, we see a multitude of people claiming Christ as their savior with a multitude of different practices in regard to the conditions set forth in the one covenant.  The problem is readily obvious.  If a confirmed covenant cannot be altered by mankind, then the consequences of what we see in the denominational world today is that people have taken it upon themselves to alter the conditions and are therefore living outside the requirements of the covenant.  By altering the conditions of God’s covenant and not adhering to them, they have placed themselves in a position where God is not obligated to fulfill His role in the covenant.  In simple terms, if mankind alters the conditions of God’s covenant, then God is under no obligation to provide the blessings promised in the covenant.

Galatians 3:16
“Now to Abraham were the promises spoken, and to his seed. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.”

Paul identifies here what the promise was which was spoken to Abraham.  The word “seed” is singular and Paul went out of his way to tell them he was not referring to the people of the nation of Israel.  The Judaizers were telling the Galatian Christians that they had to be identified with Abraham through observation of certain ordinances of the old law given through Moses.  They were claiming that the promise of Abraham was given to them only through Moses.  Paul  is telling them that the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed.  God did not say to Abraham that the promise was given to seeds (plural), which the Judaizers were claiming by saying that the promise came through Moses.  He then goes on to identify who the seed of promise was which was given to Abraham, “but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ”.  This promise was given to Abraham after he offered his son Isaac on the alter in Gen 22:18, “In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.” (NKJV).  The conclusion Paul wants his readership to understand here is that the blessing of Abraham came through Jesus Christ directly and not through the Jews.  Gentile Christians do not have to go through the old law of Moses to get to Jesus Christ.  Gentile Christians are in reality identified with Abraham through Christ and Christ only.  Paul states this more clearly in verse 18. 

It is significant in the understanding of this verse that we realize that this promise was spoken only to two individuals.  It was given to Abraham and it was given to his “seed” which is positively identified as Jesus Christ in this verse. 

A paraphrase of this verse could rightly read:  God spoke the promise directly to Abraham and to his descendant.  God did not use the word “descendants” meaning more than one.  Rather, He specifically used the phrase “And to thy descendant” which is Christ.

Galatians 3:17 “Now this I say: A covenant confirmed beforehand by God, the law, which came four hundred and thirty years after, doth not disannul, so as to make the promise of none effect.”

With the words Paul used, “Now this I say“, he is going to make a point based on what he had previously written.  The law He gave to Moses does not override, alter, change, or nullify the covenant He made with Abraham in any way shape or form.  This is a very important point everyone needs to keep in mind.  God has given many promises to many people throughout history.  God’s promises, or covenants, do not cancel each other out.  They are not time sensitive in that a promise, law or covenant given 430 years later cancels or amends a promise given previously to someone else.  God keeps all of His promises, fulfills all of His covenants and expects all of His laws to be followed in the times where they apply. 

We today can take great comfort in knowing that God keeps all of His promises.  We do not serve a God who changes his mind, amends His laws and makes situational promises.  He is a God we can trust, count on and depend on to do what He said He would do.

Galatians 3:18
“For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no more of promise: but God hath granted it to Abraham by promise.”

The Judaizers were teaching that Gentile Christians had to be identified with Abraham through Moses, or the law of Moses.  The result of what the Judaizers were teaching is that the promised Messiah came from Abraham only by way of Moses.  God promised Abraham that all the nations of the world would be blessed through him.  The law of Moses could not change the promise God gave to Abraham.

What Paul is telling his readership here is that if the blessings promised to Abraham were dependant upon the law of Moses, then it was no longer the promise God made to Abraham.  Paul is teaching here that the law of Moses does not stand between Abraham and Christianity.  If it did, then Paul is saying that in essence, God would have broken His promise to Abraham which He confirmed by swearing to Himself as we saw in Hebrews 6:13. 

“so as to make the promise of none effect.”

Concerning the promise given to Abraham, Paul wrote in Romans 4:13-14, “For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law [of Moses] but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if those who are of the law [of Moses] are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect” (NKJV).  Paul gives us another important piece of information here.  He confirms that the promise given to Abraham did not go through the law of Moses and he teaches that those who live under the law of Moses are not heirs to the promises, moreover if they were heirs then both the gospel system of faith and the promises given to Abraham and his descendant are worthless. 


The Purpose of the Law of Moses

Galatians 3:19
“What then is the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise hath been made; (and it was) ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator.”

The Judaizers had been inserting the law of Moses into the gospel and Paul has been arguing against this and now Paul is going to explain the original purpose of the law of Moses.  He begins by asking the question, “What then is the law?”

The answer was, “It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise hath been made“.  The law of Moses was given as a means of dealing with the sins of the Israelites on a temporary basis.  It was added because of their sins until the seed should come to whom the promise had been made.  Earlier in verse 16 we saw the introduction of Jesus Christ as the seed of promise through which all the nations of the earth would be blessed.  So we see here that the law was a temporary measure put into place for sin, only until the arrival of Jesus Christ.  When the seed through which all the nations of the earth were to be blessed, the law of Moses would be fulfilled and brought to an end.

The term “added” in respect to the law of Moses did not mean something that was added to the original promise given to Abraham with the intent of completing or amending the law of Moses in any way.  The original language means that the law of Moses was given in addition to the promise made to Abraham and not as a necessary component of it.  In other words, the promise given to Abraham stood on its own without the intercession of the law of Moses. 

Paul’s usage of the word “till” was meant to teach his readership that the law of Moses had a built in time limitation.  It was never intended to be in effect as a law forever.  Prophecies were given during the time of the law of Moses in order to show that it was going to be replaced by another system.  Jeremiah 31:31-34, Isaiah 2:2-4, Micah 4:1-4.  Paul’s readership needed to understand this because the Judaizers were forcing the old law of Moses between the Gentiles and Jesus Christ. 

 “(and it was) ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator.”

The giving of the law of Moses at the hands of angels is demonstrated in Acts 7:51-53 in particular verse 53 where it reads, “who have received the law [of Moses] by the direction of angels and have not kept it“; and again in Hebrews 2:1-3, “Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away. 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him” (NKJV). 

The law of Moses was given to man through the angels under the guidance of a mediator.  The difference between the law of Moses and the gospel is that there were no angels between the mediator and mankind.  The law of Christ was first spoken directly to man by Christ Himself and later confirmed by those He taught directly, meaning the apostles and disciples who accompanied Him during his earthly ministry.

Galatians 3:20
“Now a mediator is not (a mediator) of one; but God is one.”

There are literally hundreds of interpretations of this verse.  To understand this verse, one needs to consider a more literal translation.  Young’s literal translation is thus: “and the mediator is not of one, and God is one.”   The key to understanding this verse is to identify what the mediator is.  Logic demands that the mediator in this verse is the same one as the prior verse.  Therefore the meaning of this verse must take this into consideration and still make sense.  In any sentence, if the terms are correctly identified, one can substitute the term with its definition and the meaning of the sentence will not be changed. 

For example, if one takes the sentence, “I’m going to wash my clothes” and substitutes the correct definition for the term “wash” then the sentence should mean the same thing and still make sense.  “I’m going to apply water or some other liquid for the purpose of cleansing my clothes.”

Backing up to verse 19 and getting the whole context in a more literal translation, we read “Why, then, the law? On account of the transgressions it was added, till the seed might come to which the promise hath been made, having been set in order through messengers in the hand of a mediator.  And the mediator is not of one, and God is one” (YLT). 

The Greek word for mediator is ‘mesitou’ which means one who intervenes or goes between two.  Thus it is evident that the mediator must be Moses since he was who received the old law at the direction of the heavenly messengers and delivered it to the Israelites.  So let’s go back and substitute the term mediator with the term Moses.

“What then is the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise hath been made; (and it was) ordained through angels by the hand of Moses. Now Moses is not (a mediator) of one; but God is one.”

There is a contrast here as evidenced in the overall context.  The contrast is between the giving of the law of Moses at the hand of a mediator and the promise given to Abraham and Christ directly by God.  This fact is significant in the proper understanding of this verse.  Now the task at hand is in understanding the meaning of this verse so that it harmonizes with the overall context of what Paul is trying to teach his readership.  We need to keep in mind the base argument that Paul is making is the contrast between the law of Moses and the system of Faith under which all Christians now live.  All of these things need to fit together and harmonize so that the meaning of this verse progresses smoothly and sensibly and the meaning must compliment Paul’s overall message. 

Keep in mind, the Judaizers were trying to insert the law of Moses between Abraham and Jesus Christ.  Paul had just told them in the previous verses that God had made a covenant directly with Abraham and his descendant who was Christ.  The law of Moses had nothing whatsoever to add to it, moreover, God’s covenant with Abraham did not depend on anything from the law of Moses in order to fulfill its terms.  God’s covenant with Abraham stood on its own merits without any intervention by any third party.  God’s covenant with Abraham had no mediator because it was between God, Abraham and Christ directly. 

So the conclusion here is that a mediator is not needed when God makes a covenant directly with someone.  God’s covenant with Abraham did not need a mediator.  The Judaizers were trying to insert a mediator between Christ and His people.  Paul is telling them they do not require a mediator such as Moses in order to have access to Jesus Christ.  He is teaching them that they have direct access to the supreme administrator of the new covenant.   All the members of the Godhead are one so a covenant coming directly from Jesus Christ is the same as if it had come from God the Father.  So a paraphrase of Galatians 3:16-20 reflecting all of this in harmony might read:

God made promises both to Abraham and to his descendant. God did not say, “and to your descendants.” That would mean many people. But God said, “and to your descendant.” That means only one person and that person is Jesus Christ.

This is what I mean: God had an agreement with Abraham and promised to keep it. The law of Moses, which came four hundred thirty years later, cannot change or alter that covenant that it should destroy the promise God made directly with Abraham.  If the promise given to Abraham and his descendant must come through the law of Moses, then it can no longer be a promise given only to Abraham and his descendant.  

So what was the purpose of the law of Moses?  It was given as a temporary measure for the sins of man until Abraham’s descendant came to whom the promise was made.  The old law was given through messengers who used Moses as a mediator to give the law to the people.  But a mediator such as Moses is not necessary when God makes a covenant directly with someone.  All the Godhead is one so a covenant with Christ is the same as a covenant with God the Father.”

In addition to this, it must be noted that, similar to the promise given directly to Abraham and his descendant, the new testament is a covenant given directly to mankind by God, mediated by Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2:5, Hebrews 8:6; 9:15; 12:24), who is one with God (John 10:30), therefore He is God (John 1).  The new covenant doesn’t need a human mediator any more than the promise to Abraham did.  The Judaizers were trying to put a human mediator between God and His children.  This would never work and this is the message Paul was trying to get across to his readership.  The application for us today is that if we appeal to the law of Moses for our justification, we are inserting a law given to man through a mediator into a covenant given to man directly by God.  

Through our study of this, we also come to realize a major advantage that the system of Faith we live under today has over the law of Moses. The law of Christ was given by Christ directly to man. The law of Moses was delivered to man via heavenly messengers, operating through Moses who was a human mediator. The mediator of the new covenant is Jesus Christ who is God. The system of faith we enjoy today is superior to the law of Moses in every way, having been delivered directly to man by God and mediated by God.

Galatians 3:21
“Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could make alive, verily righteousness would have been of the law.”

Does the law of Moses stand in opposition to or serve as a replacement to the promise given by God to Abraham?  Absolutely not, because if the law of Moses had been able to serve in that capacity, then the righteousness would have been obtainable through and by the law of Moses.  The law of Moses was incapable of making anyone right before God as we read in Acts 13:39, “and by Him everyone who believes is justified from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses.”  Paul is telling his readership that if the law of Moses could make sinners righteous, then the keeping of the law of Moses is how it would be done. 

It must be noted here that no reference to any law other than the law of Moses has been made in this context.  Many today try and use this and the following verses to promote the doctrine of antinomianism which means ‘against law’.  Proponents of this doctrine will use these verses as proof texts to back up their claims that there is no law under the gospel.  Such is not the case at all.  There is indeed law under the new covenant if you think of it as a rule of conduct which has to be done if one is to receive eternal life.  It is absolutely necessary for a Christian to do the will of God in order to enter into the kingdom of heaven, (Matthew 7:21).  This includes but is not limited to faith, confession, repentance and baptism all of which are necessary if one is to be saved.  If there is any act or conduct which one must either engage in (Luke 13:3, Mark 16:16, Romans 10:10), or refrain from (1 Corinthians 6:9, Gal 5:19-21), then there is law in the new covenant.  And the verses cited demonstrate beyond any question or doubt that law is indeed present in the new covenant.

Galatians 3:22
“But the scriptures shut up all things under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.”

The Greek word for “shut up” is ‘sugkleio’ which means to conclude or to enclose in on all sides.  This means the scriptures pronounced the bondage of sin on all men, both Jew and Gentile alike.  The context of the letter is about the contrast between the law of Moses and the law of faith, however, the wages of sin is death under either system of faith (Romans 6:23).  If this were not true, then sin would not be possible under the faith system. 

Looking to Paul’s parallel treatment of the promises given to Abraham in Romans 4 we see in verse 15 that Paul writes, “Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.”  Keeping in mind that Paul began explaining the purpose of the law of Moses in verse 21, now he is explaining an effect of the law.  The law of Moses condemned everyone for sin from which there was no escape.  Paul is constantly touching on the fact that the law of Moses could not justify anyone (Acts 13:39).  All the law of Moses was able to do in the area of sin was to condemn because the atoning sacrifices were unable to completely take sin away (Hebrews 10:4). 

that the promise

The promise here is the same promise Paul has been referring to throughout this context which is the promise given to Abraham and his descendant that all the nations of the earth, both Jew and Gentile, would be blessed. 

by faith in Jesus Christ

Faith in Christ is how the promise given to Abraham and his descendant is obtained and not in any way through the law of Moses.  The Greek word for “faith” in this passage is the word ‘pistis which is the noun form meaning faith as an object. 

might be given”

The promises given to Abraham and his descendant are likewise given to those living under the new testament.  Man did nothing whatsoever to earn or deserve these promises in any way. On the contrary, the only thing man deserves for sin is the condemnation pronounced by the law of Moses.  The blessings brought about in Christ as a result of the promises given to Abraham and his descendant are in every way a priceless gift.  Without that gift all mankind would be doomed to eternal separation from God.  There is nothing mankind has to offer for this gift that God does not already possess.  Our lives were  forfeit as a result of sin.  Jesus Christ bought us back from death with His sacrifice and freed our souls from the bondage of sin.  Purchased with the price of His blood, Christians are not their own (1 Corinthians 6:19), therefore we have nothing to offer God which is not already rightfully His.  In that regard, the promises we inherit through the blessings of Christ are a gift no matter what it may cost us in time, effort or resources.  Even if we die in service to God, we still have not contributed one iota towards payment for what is given because God already owns our lives.   Jesus illustrates this in John 6:27, where He said, “Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set His seal on Him.” (NKJV). 

“to them that believe.

Faith in Jesus Christ is the condition upon which the promises are given.  The promises are given to those who “pisteuo” in the Greek, which is the verb form of the word we use for believe.  Every translation I am aware of translates this word as “believe”.  Many words in the original Greek have more than one meaning.  Sometimes these meanings are related and sometimes they are not related in any way.  When this occurs, the translators use the context in order to determine the correct English word to use. 

We have similar words like this in the English language as well.  For example, the word ‘interest’ can either mean money earned on savings or an expression of curiosity for a given subject.  The word is identical but the meanings are totally unrelated.  There are Greek words like this as well, especially so because there are many fewer words in the original Greek than we have today in English.  The Greek word for the verb “pisteuo” has three meanings. 

1) believe
2) Put trust with
3) Commit

The translators translated this word as “commit” only three times in the KJV. 

Luke 16:11
If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?

John 2:24
But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men

1Thessalonians 2:4 “But as we were allowed of God to be put in trust with the gospel, even so we speak; not as pleasing men, but God, which trieth our hearts.

I am not a Greek scholar but I see no reason why this word could not be translated “commit” instead of “believe“.   This is true for a great many other passages of scripture as well.  The correct translation in this case and in all others is dependent upon the context.  It is my personal conviction that translators lean toward the word “believe” instead of “commit” as a result of a predisposition favoring the doctrine of salvation by faith alone.  Whether or not the word is correctly translated as “believe” or “commit” makes little difference anyway because true Biblical belief is understood to be faith in action. 

Now we need to examine the context to determine if such a translation fits.  The text reads, “But the scriptures shut up all things under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.”  Or one may say that the promise by faith in Christ might be given to those who have faith.  That really does not make a lot of sense and at least one commentator has speculated that the “faith in Christ” is not the faith once delivered, but the faith that Christ had in God the Father to fulfill the promises.  And such an understanding does no violence to the overall understanding of scripture and does make more sense of the phrase Paul used.  However, the term “commit” for “pisteuo” also makes more sense of the phrase Paul used and likewise causes no conflict with Biblical teaching as a whole. 

A paraphrase of this verse might read thus:  “But the scriptures pronounce all mankind to be in the condemnation of sin, that the promise given to Abraham’s descendant, through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to all those who commit to Him”.  I will say, given the context and the way Paul structured this sentence, the information being presented by Paul is best illustrated in this way.  Not only does it make sense of verse 22, it defines Paul’s meaning of the term “faith” for the rest of this chapter and beyond.

Galatians 3:23
“But before faith came, we were kept in ward under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.”

It should be noted here that the original language contains the definite article for ‘the’ within the sentence so that it should read “But before the faith came“.  The only modern translations this Bible student knows of that translates this verse correctly is the Everlasting Gospel by Hugo McCord and Young’s literal translation.  This very same thing occurs again in verse 25 and again in verse 26. 

Galatians 3:23-26
23 Now, before the faith came, we were held under custody by the law, imprisoned until the coming of the faith about to be revealed.
24 The law, therefore, became our guide to Christ, so that we might be justified by faith.
25 Now, that the faith has come, we are no longer under the guide.
26 All of you are children of God through the faith in Christ Jesus,

McCord, Hugo, The Everlasting Gospel (The New Testament, Genesis, Psalms, and Proverbs)

Galatians 3:23-26
23 And before the coming of the faith, under law we were being kept, shut up to the faith about to be revealed,
24 so that the law became our child-conductor — to Christ, that by faith we may be declared righteous,
25 and the faith having come, no more under a child-conductor are we,
26 for ye are all sons of God through the faith in Christ Jesus,

Young, Robert (Translator), Young’s Literal Translation

The figure of speech, “kept in ward” is of a jailor who keeps his prisoners locked up.  The law could not save men, and the final deliverance from the sin would only be realized by the arrival of the faith of Christ.

Hebrews 7:19, “for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God” (NKJV).

Hebrews 10:9-10, “then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second. 10 By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all (NKJV).

The law of Moses was replaced with the law of Faith as it is called in Romans 3:27.  Paul is teaching his readership here that “before the gospel system of faith arrived, we were kept under guard like prisoners by the law of Moses, in bondage of sin until the faith of Christ which would replace the law was at last revealed.

Galatians 3:24
“So that the law is become our tutor (to bring us) unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.”

The term “tutor” used here has a special meaning to those living in the first century.  the KJV uses the term schoolmaster.  These terms come from the Greek word “paidagogos” and is where we get the English word Pedagogue.  The original meaning of this word was a slave, or someone else who escorted children to and from their place of instruction. It was their duty to guide and protect the student or young child to and from school.  Today it simply means a teacher or schoolteacher of children.  The idea here is that the law of Moses served as a pedagogue to guide, guard and protect the Jews to their final place of instruction by Christ where they would be afterwards justified by the faith.  

The protection of the law of Moses came in the atonement of sin.  While the law of Moses was incapable of complete justification of man from sin, it was capable of the atonement of sin.  The word atonement carries the meaning of appeasement which is a temporary pacification of God’s righteous judgment.  In other words, God allowed the blood sacrifices of animals to appease His righteous requirement for justice.  In this aspect, the law of Moses was able to afford those living under it a degree of protection until Christ died on the cross.  When Christ died on the cross, His sacrifice then accomplished the complete redemption of the transgressions of those who lived under the law of Moses.

Hebrews 9:15, “And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance” (NKJV).

After the coming of the gospel system of faith, the law of Moses as a means of atonement for sin was discontinued.  But it is still useful as a teacher to Christians under the gospel system.  The old law foretold the coming of Christ through prophecy which is useful in the confirmation of our faith in Christ.  It also teaches us how God views and reacts to sin. 

What Paul means in verse 24 is that The old law has become to us all a guide and protector to bring us to Jesus Christ, that afterwards we would be justified by the gospel system of faith. 

Galatians 3:25
“But now faith that is come, we are no longer under a tutor.”

But now that the faith of Christ has fully arrived, we do not need a guide and protector to bring us to the faith of Christ.  The faith was our final destination all along.  We do not need the guidance and protection of an escort any longer.  We are at our final destination and the services of the pedagogue are no longer useful or required. 

This thought goes along with the old law being given to use through a mediator as discussed in our study of verse 20.  The difference between the law of Moses and the law of Christ is that Christians under the gospel system of faith get their teaching directly from Jesus Christ.  The pedagogue in new testaments times was not the primary instructor of the child he was escorting.  The primary responsibility of the pedagogue was to get the child safely to and from the place of instruction.  Now that the law of Moses has guided the Jews to the master teacher, its services are no longer required.  Christians under the law of Christ are getting their entire guidance, protection and instruction directly from God.  We have no further need for the services of the pedagogue.  The gospel as recorded in scripture is inspired by or given directly by God and throughly furnishes us (2 Timothy 3:16).

Paul is teaching in verse 25 that now that the faith of Christ has arrived, we no longer require the protection and guidance of the law of Moses. 


All Christians are Sons of God and Heirs of the Promise through Baptism

Galatians 3:26
“For ye are all sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus.”

The Judaizers had been telling the Galatian Christians that they had to go through the law of Moses in order to be a son of God.  This was a big hangup with them because for centuries they considered themselves to be the chosen ones and the children of God.  They considered this to be their birthright because of their nationality.  There were Gentile converts to the law of Moses and they had to be circumcised in order to be the recipient of the same covenant privileges as the native Israelites.  The Judaizers were insisting that the Galatian Christians could not be identified as the sons of God unless they underwent circumcision.  Under the law of Moses, a gentile convert had to submit to circumcision in order to be become as one of the Israelite children of God.  Under the gospel system, anyone can become a child of God without circumcision. 

Paul is telling his Galatian brethren that they do not have to be circumcised in order to be the sons of God.  And he is telling them that the way to become the children of God is through the system of faith which came with Christ Jesus and not by the keeping of any part of the law of Moses whatsoever. 

Galatians 3:27
“For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ.”

To this point, Paul has spent a considerable amount of time in explaining the superiority of the gospel system of faith over the law of Moses and that one does not have to be circumcised in order to be identified as a child of God.  Much has been said about their direct access to Jesus Christ through the gospel system of faith.  He has explained to them that the law of Moses did indeed have a purpose, but it was not a necessary component in order to enjoy the blessings given to Abraham and his descendant. 

Now we learn that one has direct access into Christ through baptism. Under the gospel system of faith, baptism in water has replaced circumcision as a necessary initiatory rite into the family of God.  Notice carefully that this declarative statement is used in conjunction with Paul’s statement in the previous verse “through faith“.  When you read both verses together it is obvious that baptism is an inseparable component of faith in Christ Jesus.  Faith without baptism in water is therefore an incomplete faith.  Paul uses similar language in Romans 6 where the purpose for baptism really comes alive for us. 

Romans 6:3-4, “Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life” (NKJV).

Paul is telling his readership that the way into Christ, thus being in the family of God, is through baptism in water.  The past tense indicates that his readership had already done this.  They had already been baptized [immersed] into Christ and had therefore put Him on.  The original language for “put on” carries the meaning of “sinking into a garment” or “to invest with clothing”.  Clothing is worn on the outside of oneself and is for the purpose of adornment and protection.  The idea here is that through baptism in water, they had been admitted into the family of God (in Christ) and that they were clothed by; enveloped by and protected by Him.  When we put Christ on in baptism we are putting ourselves under His protective care.  The sense of adornment in this phrase is that in Christ we now appear righteous.  When one is adorned with Christ, the former dirty garments which are representative of sin are gone and replaced with the garments of righteousness.

The Galatian Christians had already done this.  This was something the law of Moses was incapable of accomplishing therefore they had no need for it in any way. 

Galatians 3:28
“There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female; for ye all are one (man) in Christ Jesus.”

Paul puts an end to the racial prejudice which was fueling the actions of the Judaizers.  When one is in Christ, adorned by and protected by Him, there is no such thing as ethnic differences.  Paul is telling them it does not matter who you are, if they are in Christ, they are united with Him.  Paul explained this in great detail in his letter to the gentile Christians in Ephesus in Ephesians 2:12-18, “that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. 17 And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. 18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father” (NKJV).

The application for us today from this is that all who are in Christ are equal. There is therefore no room in the heart of any Christian in the first century and today for racial, ethnic or gender specific prejudice.  In God’s eyes, we are all His children.

Galatians 3:29
“And if ye are Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, heirs according to promise.”

Here is Paul’s summary statement regarding the claims the Judaizers had been making in that the promise to Abraham had to come through the law of Moses.  Much of what Paul has said previously was leading up to this statement.  Anyone who belongs to Christ is Abraham’s seed in keeping with the promise given to Abraham.   Notice here that Paul used the singular form of “seed” like he did in verse 16 where he specifically identified Christ as the seed [singular] to whom the promise was made.  The idea here is that those who belong to Christ are so much a part of Him that all are one.  As a child of God through Christ, we are in a family relationship with Him to the extent that we are part of Christ.  As a member of the family of Christ, we are Abraham’s seed.  Collectively we become the descendant of Abraham to whom the promise was given. 

Initially Paul specifically identified Abraham’s singular seed as Christ.  Now in his summary statement regarding the promise given to Abraham, he includes all Christians as being Abraham’s seed.  The significance of this statement cannot be overlooked.  The unity and closeness we have with Jesus Christ is unlike anything anyone living under the law of Moses could hope for.   The Galatian Christians of the first century and all Christians everywhere else and afterwards need to understand the vast advantages available under the gospel system of faith under which we live today.  We have an incomparable blessing through Christ which no one living under the old law had access to.  Let us always keep this in mind and ever strive to honor God and glorify God who made this possible.  Let us never allow ourselves to become complacent and take the wonderful blessing we have through Christ for granted.  We are the children of God, we are of the family of God, we are one with Christ.  Nothing else can ever compare with that. 

Galatians 3 Paraphrase

Why are you Christians in Galatia so foolish?  You have allowed the Judaizers to deceive you even after I have preached Christ to you so clearly that it was like He had been crucified among you instead of in Jerusalem.  So answer this one question for me.  Did you receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit by following the law of Moses or by the hearing of the faith of Christ?  Have you suffered so much for the gospel only to throw it all away for nothing?  I ask you again, did the Holy Spirit work miracles among you when you started following the law of Moses or when you heard the faith of Christ? 

Abraham committed his trust in God and it was accounted to him for righteousness.  Because of that, you must understand that only those who are of the faith of Christ are sons of Abraham.  Long ago, before the gospel came, the scriptures foretold that God would justify the Gentiles by the faith of Christ.   And we know from scripture that Abraham was included in the promise because it was written, “in you shall all the nations of the earth be blessed”.  So then, those who are of the faith of Christ are blessed with faithful Abraham. 

Also, those who try and live by the law of Moses are bound under a curse which is written in Deuteronomy 27:26 which says “‘Cursed be anyone who does not confirm the words of this law by doing all of them”.  Now, in this time, no man can be declared right before God by living under the law of Moses.  It is apparent that the righteous must live by the system of faith in Christ. 

The law of Moses has no part in the law of faith so he who would live by the ordinances of the old law would have to live by all of them.  Christ released us from the curse of the old law by becoming the curse for it is written in Deuteronomy 21:23, “for he that is hanged is accursed of God”.  By doing this, the blessings promised to Abraham through Jesus Christ was given to the Gentiles. 

Now brethren, I’m going to explain something in terms easy to understand.  When a formal contract between men has been signed and confirmed, no other man can add anything to it or take anything away from it.  God made promises both to Abraham and to his descendant. God did not say, “and to your descendants.” That would mean many people. But God said, “and to your descendant.” That means only one person and that person is Jesus Christ.

This is what I mean: God had an agreement with Abraham and promised to keep it. The law of Moses, which came four hundred thirty years later, cannot change or alter that covenant that it should destroy the promise God made directly with Abraham.  If the promise given to Abraham and his descendant must come through the law of Moses, then it can no longer be a promise given only to Abraham and his descendant.  

So what was the purpose of the law of Moses?  It was given as a temporary measure for the sins of man until Abraham’s descendant came to whom the promise was made.  The old law was given through messengers who used Moses as a mediator to give the law to the people.  But a mediator such as Moses is not necessary when God makes a covenant directly with someone.  All the Godhead is one so a covenant with Christ is the same as a covenant with God the Father.

But the scriptures pronounce all mankind to be in the condemnation of sin, that the promise given to Abraham’s descendant, through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to all those who commit to Him.  But before the gospel system of faith arrived, we were kept under guard like prisoners by the law of Moses, in bondage of sin until the faith of Christ which would replace the law was at last revealed. The old law has become to us all a guide and protector to help bring us to Jesus Christ, that afterwards we would be justified by the gospel system of faith.

Now that the faith of Christ has arrived, we no longer require the protection and guidance of the law of Moses because we are all sons of God through the system of faith in Christ Jesus.  Because all of you who have been immersed into Christ have adorned and shielded yourselves with Him.  There can be no division between Jew and Gentile, slave and free, male and female. In the family of Christ, we are all one in Him.  And anyone who belongs to Christ is now therefore the descendant of Abraham and a recipient of the promise given to him by God. 

Posted in David Hersey | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Galatians 3

Fast Food

Fast Food Fantasy Fabrications

Did you know that Burger King, Sonic, and Carl’s Jr. are actually all a part of McDonalds? Neither did I, but apparently they are – at least according to some. But before explaining this incredibly well-kept corporate secret, perhaps a few historical facts are in order (Note: the following quotes and much of the information below is taken from Wikipedia and cross-checked with information obtained from other sites.):

McDonalds:In 1937 Patrick McDonald opened an octagonal food stand on route 66 in Monrovia, California, wherein he sold hamburgers for ten cents apiece at the time. In 1940, his two sons, Maurice and Richard (“Mac” and “Dick”) relocated the entire building 40 miles to the east, to West 14th and 1398 North E Streets in San Bernardino, California, where they renamed it “McDonald’s Famous Barbecue” and served over forty barbecued items.

“In October, 1948, after the McDonald brothers realized that most of their profits came from selling hamburgers, they closed down their successful carhop drive-in to establish a streamlined system with a simple menu of just hamburgers, cheeseburgers, French fries, shakes, soft drinks and apple pie. The carhops were eliminated to make McDonalds a self serve operation. Mac and Dick McDonald had taken great care in setting up their kitchen like an assembly line in order to ensure maximum efficiency. The restaurant’s name was again changed, this time to simply “McDonald’s,” and reopened its doors on December 12, 1948.”

In 1954, Ray Kroc visited the restaurant, and believing that it was a worthwhile and money-making project, obtained the rights to franchise them throughout the country, opening his first one in Des Plaines, Illinois, not far from his hometown of Chicago, on April 15, 1955 – which, incidentally, was the day he “incorporated his company as McDonald’s Systems, Inc (which he would later rename McDonald’s Corporation).”

Name:

Founder(s):

Date:

Original Location:

Current Headquarters:

McDonalds

Patrick, Maurice, & Richard McDonald

1937-1948

San Bernardino, CA

Oak Brook, IL.

Carl’s Jr.: In 1941 Carl and Margaret Karcher borrowed $311 (using their car as collateral) to purchase a hot dog cart. Within five years they owned, opened, and operated a restaurant named Carl’s Drive-In Barbecue, in Anaheim, California.

“In 1956, Karcher opened the first two Carl’s Jr. restaurants in Anaheim, California and Brea, California; so named because they were a smaller version of his drive-in restaurant. The restaurant chain was characterized by its fast service, table service a standard feature, and its logo, the bright yellow five-pointed Happy Star… During the 1990’s Karcher and the Board of Directors began clashing over marketing and business practices, including the chain’s attempt at dual branding with such chains as The Green Burrito, which led to Karcher’s ousting as Chief executive Officer in 1993.”

“…Combined with its sibling restaurant chain Hardee’s, Carl’s Jr. is the #5 U.S. fast food chain in size after Subway (33,000+ locations), McDonald’s (32,000+ locations), Burger King (11,500+ locations) and Wendy’s (6,700+ locations).

Name:

Founder(s):

Date:

Original Location:

Current Headquarters:

McDonalds

Patrick, Maurice, & Richard McDonald

1937-1948

San Bernardino, CA

Oak Brook, IL.

Carl’s Jr.

Carl & Margaret Karcher

1941

Anaheim, CA

Carpentaria, CA

Burger King: Based on the immense success of the McDonald’s brothers’ restaurant concept which had begun in earnest in California in 1948, five years later in 1953 in Jacksonville, Florida, Keith J. Kramer and Matthew Burns founded a new company, then known as “Insta-Burger King.” After their fledgling copycat company began to falter in 1959, it was sold to James McLemore and David Edgerton who changed the name to Burger King. After eight years of ownership which included an expansion to over 250 U.S. locations, they sold the company to Pillsbury Corporation in 1967.

Eventually, the company fell into a financial slump. In 1989 the company was sold yet again, this time to a “…British entertainment conglomerate, Grand Metropolitan and its successor, Diageo… Eventually, the institutional neglect of the brand by Diageo damaged the company to the point where major franchises were driven out of business and its total value was significantly decreased. Diageo eventually decided to divest itself of the money-losing chain and put the company up for sale in 2000.

The twenty-first century saw the company return to independence when it was purchased from Diageo by a group of investment firms led by TPG Capital… Despite the successes of the new owners, the effects of the financial crisis of 2007-2010 weakened the company’s financial outlooks while those of its immediate competitor McDonalds grew.”

Name:

Founder(s):

Date:

Original Location:

Current Headquarters:

McDonalds

Patrick, Maurice, & Richard McDonald

1937-1948

San Bernardino, CA.

Oak Brook, IL.

Carl’s Jr.

Carl & Margaret Karcher

1941

Anaheim, CA.

Carpentaria, CA

Burger King

Keith Kramer & Matthew Burns

1953

Jacksonville, Fla.

Miami-Dade County, Fla.

Sonic: Following WWII, Troy N. Smith returned to Seminole, Oklahoma, and after several occupational changes, “In 1953, Smith went in with a business partner to purchase to purchase a five acre parcel of land that had a log house and a walk-up root beer stand, already named the Top Hat. The two men continued with the operation of the root beer stand and converted the log house into a steak restaurant. After realizing that the stand was averaging $700 a week in the sale of root beer, hamburgers and hot dogs, Smith decided to focus on the more profitable root beer stand. He also bought out his business partner.”

After deciding to install speakers in the parking lot and utilizing car-hops to make service more convenient for drive-up customers, his sales immediately tripled. Entrepreneur Charles Woodrow Pappe negotiated with Smith and helped start the first franchise location in Woodward, OK, in 1956, with two more drive-in locations in Enid and Stillwater in 1958. “Upon learning that the Top Hat name was already trademarked, Smith and Pappe changed the name to Sonic in 1959. The new name worked with their existing slogan, “Service with the Speed of Sound.” After the name change, the first Sonic sign was installed at the Stillwater Top Hat drive-in, which is why the Stillwater location is officially considered the first Sonic Drive-In; the original sign can still be seen there.”

Name:

Founder(s):

Date:

Original Location:

Current Headquarters:

McDonalds

Patrick, Maurice, & Richard McDonald

1937-1948

San Bernardino, CA.

Oak Brook, IL.

Carl’s Jr.

Carl & Margaret Karcher

1941

Anaheim, CA.

Carpentaria, CA

Burger King

Keith Kramer & Matthew Burns

1953

Jacksonville, Fla.

Miami-Dade County, Fla.

Sonic

Troy N. Smith Sr.

1953

Shawnee, OK.

Oklahoma City, OK

Now please notice that all four of the above fast food restaurant chains were started by completely different and unrelated people, in different and distant places, in different years and for different reasons (with at least one apparently designed to simply be somewhat of a “knock-off” or “copycat” simply because the original concept of such a “fast-food” restaurant was seen as a way to make a quick profit by someone else). They also have different corporate headquarters, different uniforms, different logos and locations, and different standard operating procedures, business practices and philosophies.

For just one of a vast myriad of examples that could be cited, while McDonald’s and “copycat” rival Burger King believe in and practice more step-up counter service, Carl’s Junior prominently features more table service, while Sonic neither believes in nor prefers either of those practices, but still features their landmark, trademark, drive-up car-hop style service.

So with all the above facts in hand, how could even the most casual objective observer even begin to believe – let alone consider claiming – that they (and all of the other unnamed-in-this-study fast food restaurant chains) are all actually and in reality, really just all part of some huge, one and the same company? Let’s face it, they couldn’t. Look; even those who just list these different companies’ worth, number of locations, and etc, list them individually (see above)! Even they understand that these are competitors in the fast-food business and not unified co-workers for the same huge company, who simply dress in different uniforms and practice different procedures; who take their orders from the same home headquarters and receive their rewards (paychecks) all from the same place! To say that all of these and the rest of the fast food restaurants world-wide are all just simply part of the one, original fast-food company is, well, quite frankly, absurd… its fool’s talk. Everybody knows better. People realize and recognize this without ever even thinking about it. It’s that simple.

So why even bring such a thing up? Why spend all of this time and effort on such an absurdity as saying that they’re all part of the same, one, original company; that Burger King, Sonic, and Carl’s Jr. are actually all a part of McDonalds, and that it’s all part of some great, well-kept corporate secret, when such a statement is such utter and unbelievable foolishness? Here’s why (and hear me well): Because many millions of misled religious people will spend eternity in Hell, precisely because they bought into this same, exact, and insane line of reasoning when it comes to their “churches.”

Listen: The Lord’s one New Testament church (Ephesians 1:22-23, 4:4-6) originated and was established in Jerusalem during the days of the Roman Empire just as prophesied (Isaiah 2:2-3; Daniel 2:31-44), when that church/kingdom was opened up by Peter just as Jesus promised (Matthew 16:18-19),         on the Day of Pentecost in 33 A.D., as recorded in Acts 2:1-47 (WHICH IS A MUST-READ). In that chapter, which chronicles the origination and establishment of the Lord’s church in that place and on that date, we see that Peter, prompted by the Holy Spirit and based on the peoples’ belief in the message he preached, bound repentance and baptism – very specifically and exclusively as a pre-requisite and requirement – in order for them to then receive the forgiveness of sins, the gift of the Holy Spirit, and entrance into the Lord’s church (36-47).

From that point on, through to the end of Jude, we see the Lord’s one, New Testament Church in existence, and being instructed directly from their heavenly headquarters (II Timothy 3:14-4:4), by the Owner (Acts 20:28) and Head Himself (Ephesians 1:22-23) as to His precise and exact “standard operating procedures” and requirements when it came to conducting their “spirit and truth worship” (John 4:23-24). These requirements for His church included singing His praises (never did His instructions for His church ever include “playing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs,” but always He instructed singing only (cf: I Corinthians 14:15; Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16). Other requirements and commandments which He as the Head and Owner handed down from His heavenly headquarters and which His true church (that truly wants to receive the reward He has to offer when their work here is done) both practiced then when the Lord’s church was in its infancy stages in the first century and still does today, would include:

  • Taking communion and giving of our means on the 1st day of each week (Acts 20:7; I Corinthians 16:1-2).
  • Having women remain silent in the assemblies by not teaching or leading therein (I Corinthians 14:33-37; I Timothy 2:11-15).
  • To have each autonomous congregation overseen by elders only – and these being older men who met the very strict guidelines as given by the “home office” (Titus 1:5-9; I Timothy 3:1-7).
  • Being identified by a biblical name that gives all the glory to the church Owner and the Owner alone (Acts 4:12); a name such as is found in Romans 16:16 where each congregation of Christ’s church in a different location was known as one of the “churches of Christ.” (This, similar to the way “McDonald’s” and “Carl’s Jr.’s” locations carry their owners’/founders’ names.)
  • Denominating or dividing by following different men and their conflicting man-made doctrines was a very serious sin that would only lead to vain and useless worship and eventual damnation and condemnation by those who practiced it (Matthew 15:7-9; Romans 16:17-18; I Corinthians 1:10-13; Galatians 1:6-10).
  • Understanding that the church and the kingdom were synonymous (Matthew 16:18-19), and that since the day of Pentecost in 33 A.D. when Christ’s church was established, the kingdom was also established on earth and that as Christians were already in and enjoying it and its benefits (Colossians 1:13-14).

While many of Christ’s other “standard operating procedures” for His church could certainly be cited from the scriptures, these should suffice. And these could be summarized as in the table that follows indicates (And remember: you can see and study scriptural documentation for each example as noted above):

Name: Church of God, church of Christ, or any one of five other scriptural names.
Founder: Jesus Christ through His handpicked and Holy-Spirit inspired apostles.
Original Location/Date: Jerusalem, 33 A.D.
Requirements for Salva-tion/Admission Into: Belief in the gospel message, repentance (turning towards God), and baptism (water immersion) specifically for and before the forgiveness of sins.
Music: Always sung, never played.
Communion: Always practiced on the first day of each and every week.
Women Leading in the Public Worship: Absolutely not. In fact, such practice is strictly forbidden by express commandment.
Congregational Oversight: Elders who meet very strict and stringent Scriptural requirements.
Denominations/Divisions: Condemned sternly and repeatedly throughout the New Testament.
Kingdom Doctrine? It came in 33 A.D. and they were in it.

However, notwithstanding the strict and scriptural condemnations and commandments against dividing and denominating mentioned above, throughout the ages, beginning with Roman Emperor Constantine (313-337 A.D.), more and more mere mortal men have come along, and sensing the power, glory, and riches that such a “religious business” and its ardent and committed followers could bring them (II Peter 2:1-3), they have instituted and originated countless copy-cat “churches” and religions, all with their own counterfeit and deceitful practices. This, very much in the same vein as the very great sins of Jeroboam when he instituted his own brand of copycat religion “which he devised in his own heart” (as listed in 1 Kings 12:26-33; previous quote from verse 33), which eventually caused God’s Old Testament people to be utterly cast out of His sight (II Kings 17).

The following table includes and illustrates just a handful of these institutions, their founders, and a few of their unscriptural and man-made additions, subtractions, unauthorized practices, and substitutions:

Name

Founder, Head, Authority

Original Location, and Date

Salvation Requirements

Music

Communion

Women Leading Worship

Elders

Denominations

Kingdom

Church of Christ

Jesus (through  His Holy word)

Jerusalem

33 A.D.

Repentance and Baptism for the forgiveness of sins

Vocal, or

A capella

Each and every first day of the week only

Never

Yes

Unacceptable and condemned by God in Scripture

Came

Catholic

Constantine, Pope

Rome

313-606

Catholic doctrine

Instrumental

At many times and events

No

No

Unacceptable

?

Lutheran

Martin Luther

Germany

1517-1546

Repentance,

Prayer

Instrumental

Varies

?

No

Are going to Heaven

Hasn’t come

Episcopal

King Henry VIII

England

1534

?

Instrumental

?

Yes

No

Sincere belief is enough

?

Presbyterian

John Calvin,

John Knox

Mid-1500’s

?

Instrumental

?

?

No

Sincere belief is enough

Hasn’t come?

Congregational

Robert Browne

England

1550

?

Instrumental

?

Yes (?)

No

?

?

Baptist

John Smythe

Holland

1607

Prayer

Instrumental

Depends…

Okay

No; Pastors

Are going to Heaven

Hasn’t come

Methodist

John Wesley

England

1739

Prayer

Instrumental

?

Yes

No

Are going to Heaven

Hasn’t come

Mormon

Joseph Smith

America

1830

?

Instrumental

No

?

Not biblical ones!

Not going (?)

Hasn’t come (?)

Seventh-Day Adventist

William Miller

America

1831

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

Jehovah’s Witnesses

Charles Russell

America

1872

?

?

?

?

No

Not going

Hasn’t come

Charismatics: Church of the Nazarene; Church of God; Assembly of God; Pentecostals

Many, as the Methodist Church split into various  factions from infighting

America

1890-1900

Receiving the Miraculous Gifts of the Holy Ghost

Instrumental

Not essential each week

Yes

No

Acceptable to God and going to heaven (?)

Hasn’t come.

Christian Church and Disciples of Christ

Split off from the church of Christ because of desire for biblically unauthorized additions

America

1890-1910

Varies from just belief to prayer mostly; baptism occasionally

Instrumental

Not essential each week in many cases

Yes

At times, but not as a neces-sity

Acceptable to God and therefore in fellowship  most of them

Varies

While there are some question marks in the above table due to this author’s unfamiliarity with these man-made denominations and their specific practices, beliefs and  doctrines, certainly the first three columns are more than enough to convince even the most casual of observers that these vastly different religious organizations, started in different centuries, and in varied countries, on different continents, by vastly different people with their own personal beliefs and agendas throughout the last two millennia, are – despite the satanically-engineered lie which will cost countless millions their eternal souls – absolutely NOT all just simply various parts of the same one, divine, original institution known as the Lord’s body/church, as seen prophesied, promised, purchased, established, and experienced in the first century as reported in pages of sacred Scripture!

For anyone to somehow seem to say or to teach that they are, just in order to justify their own desire to worship in whatever way or place they prefer instead of humbly submitting to God’s clearly commanded instructions from His home heavenly headquarters, is to use the same insane and flawed “logic” which says that Burger King, Sonic, and Carl’s Jr. are all just a part of McDonald’s! Only in this case, it’s not only futile, foolish, and flawed, but will in the end be forever fatal!

Posted in Doug Dingley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Fast Food

One Wish

If You Were Granted Just One Wish

The fervor which swept across this nation seeking to win the $500,000,000 lottery is remarkable. It is amazing to see how so many Americans think that money would bring them true happiness. The reality is that past winners of lotteries just could not handle that kind of money and their lives were ruined by such a “blessing.”

As a child, we thought about finding that bottle with the genie inside who would grant us three wishes. It was rather fun to see how our friends used their wishes to bring them imaginary happiness. It was fun, but the truth is there is no magic genie.

Suppose that you could ask God to give you just one thing. What would it be? Take just a moment to think about this before you continue reading. If He promised to grant your one request, what would you ask for? What above all else would bring you the greatest joy?

David, the man after God’s own heart, prayed that God would just do one for him. His words were, “One thing I have desired of the Lord, that will I seek . . .” Now if these were your words how would you finish his sentence? What one thing above all else would you ask God to give you? David desired one thing. He knew the nature of God was to answer his prayer so he asked God to give him just one thing.

“One thing I have desired of the Lord, that will I seek: That I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord and to inquire in His temple” (Psa. 27:4). Nothing in this world would bring greater happiness to David than this one request.

Look at the first part of David’s wish. He longed to dwell in the house of the Lord as long as he lived. There is more to this than for David to physically be in the tabernacle (the temple had not yet been built). Above all else he wanted to be with God. What about us? Paul defines the house of the Lord as the church (1 Tim. 3:15). David’s one request is so readily available for us!

He longed to behold the beauty of the Lord. Take time to think about the beauty of our God. David lived before Emmanuel came. He never saw God in the flesh, but we see Him every time we read the New Testament. God is beautiful. We are able to see the beauty of the Lord far better than David ever did!

Finally, David longed to inquire of the Lord. David only had, at best, nine books of the Bible. We have sixty six! We can inquire and know far more than David ever did. He longed to let God instruct him. We are more blessed than David!

The true blessings in this life are spiritual. Don’t waste your life chasing foolish wishes that are so material. David’s one wish should be the one we first think of!

Posted in Dan Jenkins | Tagged , , | Comments Off on One Wish

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