swarms of locusts - Swarms provides the reader with a fascinating look at the detrimental impact that the Jesuits have had in undermining genuine Biblical Christianity.

the bunker mentality...

By Michael Bunker
editor@lazarusunbound.com
Want to discuss it? Try the Forum

Galatians, Part 3

Posted by Michael Bunker
editor@lazarusunbound.com

CHAPTER 2

In order to give the Galatians a complete picture of all of his dealings with the Church in Jerusalem Paul now continues to relate the history of his contacts with that Church and with the Apostles there. He explains how he presented his Gospel to them, was approved of them, and was received into fellowship, and how his commission as Apostle to the Gentiles was validated according to God's will.

He also relates his meetings with Peter, and how he himself was no less an Apostle of God, and had in fact publicly rebuked Peter who was in error at the time. It is not unimportant, and so should not escape our notice, that the issue and contention at hand between Paul and Peter (and some of the other Apostles) in that amazing instance was that they were falling prey to some of the machinations of the Judaizing cult, and by doing so were doing harm to the cause of Justification by Faith. It is this error which stands as the primary one gripping the Galatian Churches, and so it is no wonder that the Judaizers would try to create a wedge of separation between Paul and the Apostles to the Jews.

So it is here, in this Chapter, that Paul connects his defense of himself against slanders and defamation, with a valiant defense of Justification apart from the works of the law. His case will be a complete one, and we can be assured that he will answer all the accusations of his enemies in order that the Gospel of God will be vindicated from a charge of licentiousness or lawlessness.

Verses 1-3 - Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain. But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised;

Fourteen years after his first trip to Jerusalem, Paul returns to Jerusalem with Barnabas and Titus. This is likely when the Church of Antioch was being afflicted by the same who he would later confront in his letter to the Galatians. The Antioch Judaizers were claiming that unless a man is circumcised after the manner of Moses, he cannot be saved (Acts 15:1). We can reckon, then, that this trip to Jerusalem followed his first missionary journey through the Galatian cities by a number of years. The same false brethren who had afflicted Antioch with their lies, had now made their way (following Paul it seems) into Galatia in their attempts to subvert the Gospel as it was preached of Paul. The end product of the Jerusalem council, portrayed for us in the 15^th of Acts, reveals Paul and Barnabas successful in gaining letters of support from the Apostles concerning their opposition to the doctrine that men must be circumcised in order to be saved. Paul now tells us that while in Jerusalem he communicated with them who were of reputation (as being leaders in the Church) so that they would know again the Gospel that he preached, not that he was afraid he had preached a false gospel, but in order to validate that Gospel by comparing it with that of the Jerusalem Apostles so that his unity with them, and their validation of his ministry, would not be considered to have been in vain.

Paul emphasizes that he had taken Titus with him, who was by nationality a Greek, and it was evident that the council had not only vindicated Paul's Gospel from the charge of licentiousness and lawlessness, but they had also gone to great lengths to separate themselves from the Judaizing party by refusing to cause Titus to be circumcised, which would have been a very grievous rebuke to the Pharisees among themselves who were adamant that the ceremonial law was still in effect.

Verses 4-5 - And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you;

Paul contends that the decision made by the council not to require circumcision was in direct opposition of, and was a rebuke to, the Pharisees in the Church at Jerusalem who had come in secretly to spy out Paul and his companions that they might make an accusation against him. We can only guess what type of detestable spying would have successfully confirmed the fact that Titus the Greek was not circumcised, but we do know that once this knowledge was proclaimed arrogantly and publicly by the Pharisees, that they were subsequently put to silence by the decree of the council, who refused to order him to be circumcised.

To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; This phrase reads somewhat awkwardly in our modern tongue, but it is clear what is the meaning of the Apostle. “We gave subjection to these heretics not even for an hour”, which would mean not an hour nor any part of an hour, in that the Pauline camp did not submit or subject themselves to the circumcision party for even a second. There was no equivocation on behalf of those who knew the Gospel, and it was this steadfastness that won the day against the enemies.

Verses 6-9 - But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me: But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision;

Returning to his defense against the false charges made against him, Paul reminds the Galatians that he had been charged with perverting the gospel that (it was claimed) he had received from the other Apostles in Jerusalem. To the contrary, Paul claims here that he received nothing at all in a spiritual way from the Apostles, and in doing so he even hints that the authority that seemed to be vested in the Jerusalem Church (as a type of mother church) was not recognized by Him. This is a very, very important fact. Remember that the Antichrist was already working towards being unveiled at this time, and many antichrists had gone out to deceive the Church. One of the great deceptions was the claim that the power and authority of the Church was centralized in the “seat” of Peter as chiefest of the Apostles. Paul here denies this position, and even sneers at any insinuation that the other Apostles were above him in authority. In fact, the Jerusalem apostles had validated his Apostleship with the right hand of fellowship, and agreed that he, Paul, had been sent to the Gentiles by the same authority that Peter had been sent to the Jews. So even if these Jerusalem Apostles “seemed to be pillars” (which means that they appeared to be the center of leadership in the whole Church) they did not assume such a position with him, and neither would he have respected that opinion if they had. The same God who had called Peter had called Paul, and Paul was not likely to bow to assumed authority in Jerusalem, any more than Christians in later generations should be forced to bow to pretended authority in Rome.

Verse 10 - Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do;

The Jerusalem Apostles did encourage Paul and his party to “remember the poor”, which was no new commandment at all, and Paul had already shown a concern for the poor in the Church, being that he was the agent (along with Barnabas) chosen by the Antioch Church to bring relief funds for the famine in Jerusalem (Acts 11:28-30). So the Jerusalem Church had received charity at his hand, and was in no real authoritative position to now remind him of this duty, though he does not reject it, since he was already inclined to do it anyway.

Verses 11-13 - But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation;

Paul begins to relate of his further personal experience with Peter and others of the Jews from Jerusalem, when they came to Antioch some time after the Jerusalem council. Apparently Peter had either arrived on this visit long before the Jews of his party, or he had visited one previous time when he had come alone (or without any other authorities from Jerusalem), and in either instance he had eaten with the Gentile believers there in Antioch and had portrayed himself as their brother and friend. Paul would likely have been encouraged that Peter would behave properly and honorably by eating and sharing fellowship with the Gentiles, however, when Peter came into Antioch accompanied by other Jews (likely of the Judaizing party with whom Paul had contended), he had separated himself, refusing to eat and fellowship with the Gentile believers. Others who had come to respect Peter were then carried away with this “dissimulation”, including Paul's friend and partner Barnabas. The word “Dissimulation” is the Greek word “hupokrisis” which is where we get the word “hypocrisies”. Paul considers Peter's refusal to eat with the Gentiles (when accompanied by Jews) to be deceitful and hypocritical, which it clearly was, since he had voiced no such concern over eating with Gentiles on the prior occasion. Paul, then, confronts Peter publicly over his hypocrisy. It seems evident that Peter repented, since we find no formal reply to this letter, and we find Peter speaking well of Paul in his own epistle.

Verse 14 - But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?;

When Paul saw that Peter and the Jews were acting hypocritically, he rebuked Peter in front of the Church, saying, “If you, being a Jew, are glad to live like a Gentile when you are among them privately, while not living like a legal Jew, then why would you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”. It is here that the issue moves from one of mere legalism, to one of hypocritical living. It was not just that Peter was acting legalistically, but he was doing so in a deceitful way to be approved of by the Jews. Paul had no patience for this type of hypocrisy, and he asserts his autonomy from the Jerusalem authorities by relating this very public contention between himself and Peter. It is evident to me, then, that Peter must have repented, because Paul is later in fellowship with both Peter and Barnabas. So the charges made by Paul's accusers are shown to be false from verifiable events in recent history. Any doubter in Galatia would have easily been able to check Paul's version of these events, as many people were still alive who would have been eyewitnesses to such a public rebuke.

Verses 15-18 - We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain;

It seems to me here, that this section of scriptures is a continuation of the speech made to Peter and in front of the rest of the Jews and the Church in Antioch. No break is made here in the commentary that would incline us to separate it from the preceding verses. So it seems that this section completes the speech made in Paul's rebuke of Peter. This also seems likely since he refers to “Jews by nature” as “we”, which he would not have done if he was returning to his defense before the Galatians. Paul says, “We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles”, meaning that “we who are born Jews through our natural heritage”; and Paul here introduces sarcasm, because he speaks before both Jews and Gentiles and knows that all of these professing believers would have accepted that both Jews and Gentiles are sinners. So Paul takes the part of the Jew and sarcastically infers that the Jews are sinless as opposed to the “sinners of the Gentiles”. This address would have infuriated the legalistic party (all of whom knew that they were sinners and that if they had indeed been saved, it was by grace and not because they were sinless), and it would have emphasized the point that Paul is going to make in the next couple of statements.

Paul relates that the Jews know that sinners of all kinds, especially the converted of the Jews, cannot be justified by the keeping of the law. This is evident in those Jews becoming “Christians” and therefore abandoning the ceremonial and sacrificial elements of the law as a means of Justification. Since these Jews had proclaimed that they were disciples of Jesus Christ, they would know that their Justification must come by faith in Jesus Christ, and not by the works of the law, through which they could never have been justified. Alas, Paul says, “If we Jews who are justified by faith, are found to be 'gentiles' in action (which Paul here calls “sinners”, then has Jesus become the minister of sin?” This is to say that since the Jews are sinners just like the Gentiles, and must be justified by faith, then if while they are seeking justification they sinfully return to legal justification by works, then they make Christ the minister (or teacher) of sin, because they accuse Christ of teaching them wrongly if he then asserts that Justification is accomplished only by Faith. So, while the Jews are busy trying to bring the Gentiles under a law that they themselves have found to be inadequate for their own justification, they were also accusing Christ of being the minister of sin. Paul says to this, “God forbid”, because if he ever finds himself building again what he himself has destroyed and rejected concerning his own justification (putting burdens on the shoulders of others that he himself could not carry), then he would have made of himself a transgressor of the Gospel that Christ taught.

Paul then claims that since he himself is dead to the law precisely because Christ made him alive through His own perfect keeping of the law, then his “living” is through the agency of, and for the purposes of, God, and he should not be found building again that which Christ had made dead to him. This means that Paul no more lives a life in pursuit of ceremonial and sacrificial acceptance by God, since God had made him alive and united spiritually to His divine person through faith. Being “dead to the law” does not mean that the moral law is not perpetual and obligatory to all believers. Being “dead to the law” means that those elements which pass away because they are shadows that cannot justify men (such as the ceremonial and sacrificial laws), are not afterward to be kept by men. In fact no act of the law, either ceremonial or moral, could ever justify us before God, all are abrogated as a means of Justification, and therefore are no longer in effect (being shadows that had passed away through the work of Jesus Christ, who was the real fulfillment to which those laws were mere shadows), are worthless towards the Justification of sinners. Paul then beautifully defends the life given to him by faith in Christ, so that now that he is shown to be alive by faith, he dare not frustrate (or nullify) the grace of God, showing it to be of no effect, by resting on any means of his Justification other than on that faith given by God's grace. The life that lives in Paul is the life of God, and he dare not insult that life by resting on works of his own flesh rather than the works done by Christ on his behalf. So now that he lives, it is Christ that lives in him, and this Christ has put away the law of ceremony and sacrifice by the sacrifice of Himself on the behalf of his elect. If somehow, then, Justification were by the works of the law instead of by faith in Christ, then Christ must have died in vain, because no man will ever be justified before God by the works of the law. Righteousness, which is the result of Justification in that the elect are declared “right” during the adjudication phase according to the works of Jesus Christ on their behalf, is then imputed to believers who could not perfectly keep the law or justify themselves through the law. So, righteousness is impugned if we return again to the same law for justification, having been made alive by faith.

And so Paul concludes his story of the rebuke of the Jerusalem hypocrites in order that, in the next Chapter, he can turn that rebuke towards the bewitched Galatians and those who trouble them.

We pray that God will continue to protect us from the works of the enemy, and that he will give us strength to defend the truth when we see it attacked by those who are ignorant of Grace.

I am your servant in Christ Jesus,

Michael Bunker

DISAGREE? Discuss or Debate this: Forum

Read more like this: Bunker Mentality Archives

Proceed back to the Homepage...

Back to the top!

Michael Bunker Podcast

Galatians, Part 3