Galatians 2 (Wednesday Evening Bible Study)

Galatians 2

• Galatians 2:1-10
• Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also. 2 I went up according to a revelation and presented to them the gospel I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those recognized as leaders. I wanted to be sure I was not running, and had not been running, in vain. 3 But not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. 4 This matter arose because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus in order to enslave us. 5 But we did not give up and submit to these people for even a moment, so that the truth of the gospel would be preserved for you. 6 Now from those recognized as important (what they once were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism)—they added nothing to me. 7 On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel for the uncircumcised, just as Peter was for the circumcised, 8 since the one at work in Peter for an apostleship to the circumcised was also at work in me for the Gentiles. 9 When James, Cephas, and John—those recognized as pillars—acknowledged the grace that had been given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to me and Barnabas, agreeing that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 They asked only that we would remember the poor, which I had made every effort to do.
  • In the preceding passage, Paul has proved the independence of his gospel; here, he is concerned to prove that this independence is no rebellion and that his gospel is not something divisive and factional, but nothing less than the faith delivered to the Church
  • After fourteen years’ work, he went up to Jerusalem, taking with him Titus, a young friend and supporter, who was a Greek. That visit was by no means easy. Even as he wrote, Paul was clearly agitated
    • There is a confusion in the Greek which it is not possible fully to reproduce in English translations. Paul’s problem was that he could not say too little, or he might seem to be abandoning his principles; and he could not say too much, or it might seem that he was openly at odds with the leaders of the Church
    • The result was that his sentences are broken and disjointed, reflecting his anxiety
    • Form the beginning, the real leaders of the church accepted his position; but there were others who were out to tame this fiery spirit. There were those who accepted Christianity but believed that God never gave any privilege to anyone who was not a Jew, and therefore, before a man could become a Christian, he must be circumcised and take the whole law upon him
    • These Judaizers, as there are called, seized on Titus as a test case. There is a battle behind this passage; and it seems likely that the leaders of the Church urged Paul, for the sake of peace, to give in, in the case of Titus
    • But Paul stood firm like a rock. He knew that to give in would be to accept the slavery of the law and to turn his back on the freedom which is in Christ. In the end, Paul’s determination won the day
    • In principle, it was accepted that his work lay in the non-Jewish world, and the work of Peter and James among the Jews. It should be carefully noted that it is not a question of two different gospels being preached; it is a question of the same gospel being brought to two different spheres by different people specially qualified to do so
  • From this picture, certain characteristics of Paul emerge clearly
    • He was a man who gave authority its due respect
      • He did not go his own way. He went and talked with the leaders of the Church, however much he might differ from them. It is a great and neglected law of life that, however right we happen to be, there is nothing to be gained by rudeness. There is never any reason why courtesy and determination should not go hand in hand
    • He was a man who refused to be intimidated
      • Repeatedly, he mentions the reputation which the leaders and pillars of the Church enjoyed. He respected them and treated them with courtesy; but he remained inflexible
      • There is such a thing as respect; and there is such a thing as groveling and bowing to those whom the world or the Church labels great, simply because it is expected. Paul was always certain that he was seeking the approval not of the world but of God
    • He was a man conscious of a special task
      • He was convinced that God had given him a task to do, and he would let neither opposition from without nor discouragement from within stop him doing it. Those who know they have God-given task will always find they have a God-given strength to carry it out
• Galatians 2:11-13
• 11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he stood condemned. 12 For he regularly ate with the Gentiles before certain men came from James. However, when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, because he feared those from the circumcision party. 13 Then the rest of the Jews joined his hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.
  • The trouble was by no means at an end. Part of the life of the early Church was a common meal which they called the Agape or Love Feast
  • At this feast, the whole congregation came together to enjoy a common meal provided by pooling whatever resources they had. For many of the slaves, it must have been the only decent meal they had all week; and in a very special way, it marked the togetherness of the Christians
  • On the surface, that seems like a great thing. But we must remember the rigid exclusiveness of the more narrow-minded Jews who regarded their race as the chosen people in such a way as involved the rejection of all others
  • This exclusiveness affected daily life. Strict Jews were forbidden even to do business with Gentiles; they must not go on a journey with Gentiles; they must neither give hospitality to, nor accept hospitality from Gentiles
  • Here in Antioch, a tremendous problem arose—in this situation, could the Jews and the Gentiles sit down together at a common meal? If the old law was to be observed, ti was obviously impossible
  • Peter came to Antioch and at first, shared the common meal with both Jews and Gentiles. Then some members of the Jewish party from Jerusalem arrived
  • They used James’ name, although quite certainly they were not representing his views, and they worked on Peter so much that he withdrew from the common meal. The other Jews withdrew with him, and finally even Barnabas was involved in this withdrawal
  • It was then that Paul spoke with all the intensity of which his passionate nature was capable, for he saw certain things quite clearly
    • A church ceases to be Christian if it contains class distinctions
      • In the presence of God, people are neither Jews nor Gentiles, noble nor of low birth, rich nor poor; they are all sinners for whom Christ died. If we are all children of God, we must be one family
    • Paul saw that forceful action was necessary to counteract a drift which had occurred
      • He did not wait; he struck. It made no difference to him that this drifting was connected with theme and conduct of Peter. It was wrong, and that was all that mattered to him
      • A famous name can never justify an infamous action. Paul’s action gives us a vivid example of how one strong individual by determination can halt a drift away from the right course before it becomes a tidal wave
• Galatians 2:14-17
• 14 But when I saw that they were deviating from the truth of the gospel, I told Cephas in front of everyone, “If you, who are a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel Gentiles to live like Jews?” 15 We are Jews by birth and not “Gentile sinners,” 16 and yet because we know that a person is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we ourselves have believed in Christ Jesus. This was so that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no human being will be justified. 17 But if we ourselves are also found to be “sinners” while seeking to be justified by Christ, is Christ then a promoter of sin? Absolutely not!
  • Here at last, the real root of the matter is being reached. A decision is being forced which could not in any event be delayed any longer. The fact of the matter was that the Jerusalem decision was a compromise, and, like all compromises, it had in it the seeds of trouble
  • In effect, the decision was that the Jews would go on living like Jews, observing circumcision and the law, but that the Gentiles were free from these observances. Clearly things could not go on like that, because the inevitable result was that there were now two grades of Christians and two quite distinct classes in the Church
  • Paul’s argument was this. He said to Peter; “ You shared a table with the Gentiles; you ate as they ate; therefore you approved in principle that there is one way for Jews and Gentiles alike. How can you now reverse your decision and want the Gentiles to be circumcised and take the law upon them?” It didn’t make sense to Paul
  • Now, we must make sure of the meaning of one word. When the Jews used the word sinners of Gentiles, they were not thinking of moral qualities; they were thinking of the actions that broke the law. To take an example, Leviticus 11 states which animals may and may not be used for food. Someone who ate a rabbit or pork broke these laws and became a sinner in this sense of the term. On that basis, Peter’s response to Paul would be; “But, if I eat with the Gentiles and eat the things they eat, I become a sinner.”
  • Paul had two answers. First, he said; “we agreed long ago that no amount of observance of the law can make a person right with God. That is a matter of grace. We cannot earn it, but must accept the generous offer of the love of God in Jesus. Therefore the whole business of law is irrelevant.”
  • Next, he said; “You hold that to forget all this business about rules and regulations will make you a sinner. But that is precisely what Jesus told you to do. He did not tell you to try to earn salvation by eating this animal and not eating that one. He told you to fling yourself without reserve on the grace of God. Are you going to argue, then, that He taught you to become a sinner?” Obviously, there could be only one proper conclusion, namely that the old laws were wiped out
  • This is the point that had to come. It could not be right for Gentiles to come to God by grace and for Jews to come to God by law. For Paul, there was only one reality—grace—and it was by way of surrender to that grace that all must come
  • There are two great temptations in the Christian life; and it seems that the better a person is, the more susceptible they are to them
    • First, there is the temptation to try to earn God’s favor
    • And second, the temptation to use some little achievement to compare oneself with others to our advantage and their disadvantage
    • But the Christianity which has enough of self left in it to think that by its own efforts in can please God, and that by its own achievements it can show itself superior to others is not true Christianity at all
• Galatians 2:18-21
• 18 If I rebuild those things that I tore down, I show myself to be a lawbreaker. 19 For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ, and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing.
  • Paul speaks out of the depths of personal experience. For him to put back in place the whole fabric of the law would have been spiritual suicide. He says that through the law he died to the law that he might live to God. What he means is this: he had tried the way of the law; he had tried with all the terrible intensity of his burning conviction to put himself right with God by a life that sought to obey every single item of that law. He had found that such an attempt produced nothing but a deeper and deeper sense that all he could do could never put him right with God. All the law had done was to show him his own helplessness. He had quite suddenly abandoned that way and had cast himself, sinner as he was, on the mercy of God. It was the law which had driven him to God. To go back to the law would simply have entangled him all over again in the sense of estrangement from God
  • So great was the change that the only way he could describe it was to say that he had been crucified with Christ so that the man he used to be was dead and the living power within him now was Christ himself
  • “If I can put myself to rights with God by meticulously obeying the law, then what is the need of grace? If I can win my own salvation, then why did Christ have to die?”
  • Paul was quite sure of one thing—that Jesus had done for him what he could never have done for himself
  • The one man who re-enacted the experience of Paul was Martin Luther. Luther was a model of discipline, penance, self-denial, and self-torture. “If ever a man could be saved by being a monk, that man was I.”
    • He had gone to Rome; it was considered to be an act of great merit to climb the Scala Sancta, the great sacred stairway, on hands and knees. He toiled upwards seeking that merit, and suddenly there came to him the voice from heaven: “The just shall live by faith.” The life at peace with God was not to be attained by this futile, never-ending, ever-defeated effort; it could only be achieved by casting himself on the love and mercy of God as Jesus revealed them to men and women
  • When Paul took God at His word, the midnight of law’s frustration became the sunshine of grace