One Word Sums Up the Law

 Greetings.

In Galatians 5;1, Paul has told the Galatians that it was for freedom that Christ had set them free.  Then, after a shocking statement of hope that the legalists would emasculate themselves, Paul returns to this concpet of freedom in Christ.  Here are verses 13-15. 

13 Brothers and sisters, you were called to be free, not free to indulge the flesh, but rather free to serve one another in love.  14 For, the entirety of the Law is fulfilled in that one word.  “Love your neighbor as yourself.”  15 But if you are continually biting and devouring one another, watch out or you may just destroy each other. 

In verse 13, Paul goes back to where chapter 5 starts, freedom in Christ.  In verse 1 he says’ “it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. We should stand firm then, and never again submit ourselves to the yoke of slavery.”  Paul qualifies that freedom just a little bit in verse 13. 

Paulmust  know that there are some who will say, “I am free in Christ”, and use that as license for self-indulgence, thinking, “If I am free, then I do whatever I want.”  But, that is not what this freedom means.  We are not given our freedom, just to indulge ourselves. 

Paul uses the word σαρκί (sarki) here.  It means flesh.  Our freedom in Christ does not give us the freedom to indulge our flesh.  That is not what freedom in Christ means. Moo explains, “What freedom is emphatically not, either here or elsewhere in Scripture, is that autonomy, the ‘free to be and do whatever we want’ attitude, which governs much modern thinking.” (Moo, 343.) 

So, then, what are we free to do?  In the second part, Paul says that we are “free to serve one another through love.”  Moo continues, “The freedom that Christ has won for us (v.1) and to which we have been called by God (v.13) is a freedom to be what God originally made us to be…to live in loving, sacrificial service to one another.” (Moo,343.) 

An interesting note here:  The word that I have translated as ‘serve’ is from the Greek δουλεύετε (douleuete).  This word does not come from the Greek word for servant.  It comes from the Greek word for slave.  

We are to serve one another in love. (v.13)  That is how our freedom is to be used.  (This is certainly a better use of our freedom than self-indulgence.)  Then v. 14 offers this as a way of further explanation:  ‘The entirety of the Law is fulfilled in that one word.  “Love your neighbor as yourself.”’

Paul is saying that one word sums up the whole of the Law.  That word is ‘Love.”  

Now usually this is translated as ‘the Law is fulfilled in one command ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’” But, Paul does not use the Greek word for command here, he uses the word for ‘word.’  Now, I understand why translators go with ‘command’ here, as ‘Love your neighbor as yourself’, is a command and is more than one word. I am not arguing with that translation.  However, I think that by using the Greek word λόγῳ (logō), Paul signifies the importance of that one word: Love. 

Already, here in chapter 5, he has already said that the only thing that matters or has power, is faith expressing itself through love.  

Later, when he lists off the fruits of the Spirit, the first one is love.  This is the attribute that sets God’s people apart.  Love is what drives everything. 

I love what Douglas Moo says about this:  “The reason it is important for believers to act as slaves toward one another in love is because love fulfills the law.”  (Moo, 345.)  

So, circumcision does not fulfill the law.  Love does.  Remembering verse 6, both circumcision and uncircumcision are meaningless without love.  It is the believer who loves who fulfills the law. 

So, circumcision does not fulfill the law.  Love does.  Remembering verse 6, both circumcision and uncircumcision are meaningless without love.  It is the believer who loves who fulfills the law. 

A later, Moo also says, “Paul’s wider concerns to assure the Galatians that their new life in Christ does indeed provide them with the direction (love) and the power (Spirit) that they need to live godly lives. Indeed, it is only with the coming of Christ and the gift of his Spirit that the ‘completion’ of the law has become possible.  But the completion does not take the form of obedience to the many commands of the law.  Rather, it happens as Christians love others - with a love possible only for those who are in Christ and according to the Spirit”  (Moo, 348.) 

Paul has just laid out the need for love more than once, in verses 6 and 14.  Now, in verse 15, he takes the conversation to the opposite extreme.  “But if you are continually biting and devouring one another, watch out or you may just destroy each other.”  Again we see two paths.  One path is faith at work through love, in which all will be built up.  The other path involves the opposite, where they are lnot oving toward each other.  Paul uses the figurative language of eating to express this.  Δάκνετε (daknete)” you bite” and κατεσθίετε (katasthiete) “you devour.” Many scholars believe that Paul is using the imagery of wild animals here.  Animals that would fight ferociously to the point of killing each other.  

Is this how they were treating each other?  It is hard to say, but certainly they were listening to some who were treating Paul this way.  Paul is issuing a clear warning.  Without loving relationships, people get destroyed.  

It is very easy to be critical of others. It is also very easy to hold on to a point so dogmatically that everyone who disagrees with you appears to you to be an idiot. This kind of ‘biting’ isn’t really helpful for anyone, and certainly has no place in God’s church.  

To conclude: Love is better. 

What Did He Say?

Hello.

As we continue on through chapter 5, we come to verses 11 and 12, which I have translated below.  Paul's frustration with his opponenets seems to boil over, and he bluntly says something that is quite surprising.

11 Brothers and sisters, if I still proclaim circumcision, why am I still being persecuted?  In that case, the offense of Cross is completely lost.  12 Oh, if only these agitators would just go ahead and castrate themselves. 

Paul’s meaning in verse 11 is not completely clear.  He asks, “if I still proclaim circumcision, why am I still being persecuted?”  At this point in his argument against circumcision as necessary for salvation, it seems an odd question.  By this point, he has made his stance perfectly clear.  

Some scholars believe that Paul asks this question here because some of his critics are claiming that Paul supports their position on circumcision.  This is possible.  He would be basically saying, “if I support their position, why are they so critical of me?” 

It is important to understand that Paul is not anti-circumcision.  We know that he had Timothy circumcised in Acts 16, but he also supported Titus refusal to be circumcised.  Paul’s problem with what the Galatians are buying into is that he can't support the teaching that circumcision is necessary for salvation.  This point, again, he has made abundantly clear.  Paul is not teaching the typical Jewish view on circumcision. Paul's view: neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has bearing on one’s standing with God. 

In the second part of verse 11, Paul responds to his own question with this statement: “In that case, the revulsion of the Cross is completely lost.”  What I have translated as ‘offense’ comes from the Greek word, σκάνδαλον (skandalon). The Lexicon’s best definition for the context here is: "that which causes offense or revulsion and results in opposition, disapproval or hostility: fault, stain, etc.”  

Paul’s point:  If the message becomes circumcision, then the all the Jesus endured, the torture and grotesqueness of the Cross has become meaningless.

Then, Paul lays his feelings about his detractors out completely in verse 12:  “Oh, that these agitators would just go ahead and castrate themselves.”  Here, he obviously refers to the Judaizing teachers as, Οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες (hoi anastatountes), 'those who are troubling you.'  This can be translated as troublemakers or agitators. 

Clearly in his next statement Paul is taking off the gloves.   Ὄφελον καὶ ἀποκόψονται (Ophelon kai apokopsontai) Basically, Paul is saying “I wish they would just go ahead and castrate themselves.”  The Greek word Ὄφελον can be translated as, “I wish” or “if only.”  

The Greek word ἀποκόψονται comes from the verb αποκοπτό (apokoptó). Strong’defines these words as: to amputate, mutilate or castrate.  So, Paul is expressing his disdain for these men and their insistence on circumcision, and takes their argument to the extreme, with these men completely emasculating themselves. 

David deSilva explains it this way: “The verb refers to cutting off significantly more than the foreskin, effectively wishing that those who were so eager to circumcise the Galatian converts would cut off their own members.” (deSilva, 113.)

Paul's words in verse 12 may seem extreme, but they are born out of a frustration that the Judaizing teachers, and now the Galatians, are missing the meaning of second part of verse 11. If we could somehow gain salvation through removing a piece of flesh, then the scandal and torture that Jesus endured on the Cross become meaningless, and Jesus endured it all for nothing. If Paul is right, then the Cross means everything, as our only means of salvation.   

A Little Leaven

 Greetings.

Today, we will continue our examination of Galatians 5.  We have just seen how circumcision and uncircumcision do not really matter.  What does matter, however, is faith, at work through love.  That is where we left off.  Paul continues in verses 7-10: 

7 You were running so well. Who is now keeping you from being obedient to the truth? 8 Such persuasion does not come from the One who calls you. 9 A little leaven ferments the whole batch. 10 However, when it comes to you, I am convinced, in the Lord, that you have no other mindset about this. But those who have been throwing you into confusion, whoever they are, will have to pay the penalty.

Paul tells the Galatian churches that they had started off really well, but now someone is holding them back from obeying the truth. We have seen similar statements before.  In Gal 3:1-5, asks them, “Who has cast a spell on you? Was it not before your own eyes that Jesus Christ was clearly proclaimed to be crucified?”  to remind them of those early days, when they were enjoying their freedom in Christ as brand new disciples.  

The first question is, “who?”  “Who has cast a spell on you?” (Gal. 3) and “Who is now keeping you from being obedient to the truth?” (Gal. 5)  They all knew the answer.  So, a implied second question could be, “Why are listening to those guys?  They are trying to take you away from grace and truth, and bring you to a type of religion that God did not intend.”

Verse 8 backs up my implied question. “That kind of persuasion does not come from the One who calls you.”  Jesus has never used the strongarm tactics that these men are using. These men undoubtedly spoke from a place of impressive zeal, but does not mean that what they were saying was correct and true.  Their misguided zeal is actually hindering the Galatians from growing in their knowledge of God and taking away their freedom in Christ. 

Paul follows in verse 9, “A little leaven ferments the whole batch.”  According to Douglas Moo, this was a commonly used phrase that Paul uses in 1 Cor. 5:6, as well. In the Bible, leaven, sometimes translated as ‘yeast,’ usually, but not always, means something negative.  Jesus in Matthew 16, compared the teaching of the Pharisees to leaven and told his disciples to beware of it.  However, in Matthew 13:33, Jesus compares his kingdom to leaven, so, leaven is not necessarily bad, but here in Galatians 5, it is. 

What both Jesus and Paul are talking about is leaven ability to quietly work throughout the whole batch.  That can be good or bad depending on what is being created.  

Paul’s point, just like Jesus’s point in Matt. 16, is that the legalistic spirit of the Pharisees and these false teachers work quietly and in an insidious way that spoils everything.  The Pharisees had taken Judaism far from what God had intended, all while looking very righteous.  These Judaizing teachers were doing the same thing.  

Then, in verse 10, Paul shifts gears in what he is saying.  He expresses a confidence in the Galatians that we haven't seen too much of previously.  He says that he is convinced that they will have the correct mindset about all of this, and lays the responsibility of the false gospel squarely on those who brought it to them.  This confidence in them is a far cry from “Oh, you foolish Galatians," that we had seen ealier in chapter 3. After putting forth a vigorous argument against the false teachings, he is expressing confidence that they will ultimately do the right thing.  

Paul expresses confidence in the Galatians, but he is not so kind to those who have been stirring them up and leading astray.  Regarding them, he says that they, whoever they are, will “pay the penalty.” Well, we know who “they” are, and so did the Galatians.  They are the Judaizing teachers that have come in and presented a false gospel to the Galatians.  These men, according to Paul, will face punishment for their false teaching. Perhaps this is why James warned teachers in James 3:1.  Since, those who teach a law-based legalistic gospel will pay the penalty for it, we have to get this teaching of the gospel of grace right.  

What Really Matters

Hello everyone.

Today's post will be focused on Galatians 5:6, and what really matters.  Here is my translation: "For in Jesus, the Messiah, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision, has the power to do anything.  Instead, real power comes from faith, at work through love."

Paul explains in verse 6, that neither being circumcised nor remaining uncircumcised actually mean anything.  

In the Greek, Paul uses the phrase, τι ἰσχύει (ti ischuei). τι can have many meanings, but the one that fits the context here best is 'any.'   ἰσχύει means 'strength or power."  So, Paul saying that in Jesus neither of them have any real strength or power.  David deSilva explains that this phrase would indicate that neither option has the power to accomplish anything.  (deSilva, 107.) In other words, we are not made righteous by being circumcised, and we are not made righteous by not being circumcised.  Circumcision, (and uncircumcision) have no bearing on whether we are considered righteous or not.  

In Acts 16, Paul had Timothy circumcised.  But in Galatians 2, he mentions that Titus had declined to be circumcised, and Paul clearly supported Titus in this.  So, clearly Paul could clearly go either way on the subject. But, why have Timothy circumcised? 

To be sure, Paul did not have Timothy circumcised for the purpose of fulfilling any kind of righteousness. It was not a matter of salvation. Paul wanted to take Timothy along on his journey, and in order to relate to the Jews, Paul had him circumcised.  I would think that Timothy could have, like Titus, also declined, but he did not. 

Well, if circumcision has no real meaning or power, what does?  According to Paul, the only thing that has meaning or power is "faith, at work through love."

So, what I do (circumcision) does not matter, and what I do not do (uncircumcision) does not matter.  What does matter then?  Paul tells us that what really matters is whether or not I really trust God.  Do I have faith?  And is that faith expressing itself through love?  Love for God and love for others.  (After all, what are the two greatest commands?  Both are commands to love.) 

Thomas Schreiner makes an interesting point here.  He says, “Love, then, is not the basis of justification but the fruit of faith, the result of faith.”  (Schreiner, 317.)  We love because of our faith.  Later, we see that love is indeed a fruit of the Spirit.  The Spirit produces love in us, as we are faithful.  

        David daSilva, Galatians: A Handbook on the Greek Text, Baylor University Press, Waco, Texas, 2014. 
          Thomas Schreiner, Galatians, Zondervan Academic, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 2010.  

The Origins of Righteousness

Hey everyone.

We will continue our examination of Galatians 5, looking at verses 2-5.  In verse 1 we saw that Jesus has set us free, so then, we should never allow ourselves to be tied to yoke of slavery again.  Paul continues that thought: 

2 Let me be clear! I, Paul, am telling you that if you allow yourselves to be circumcised then Christ will be of no benefit to you. 3 I bear witness once again, that every one of you that submits to circumcision becomes under obligation to keep the entirety of the law. 4 Those of you who are intent on being made righteous through law-keeping, you set Christ aside, and you lose out on grace. 5 Instead, through the Spirit, by faith, we eagerly await the hope of righteousness.

In verse 2, Paul starts with the attention getter, Ἴδε (Ide), which is often translated as “behold.”  He wants to make sure that they understand what he is about to say, since we seldom say 'behold' and we see that is trying to grab their attention, I translated it as, “Let me be clear.”  He follows that with “I, Paul, am telling you.”  He is placing a strong emphasis on the statement that he is about to make.  He says, “if you allow yourselves to be circumcised then Christ will be of no benefit to you.”  

His point:  If they are somehow earning their salvation through works, then they are no longer saved through faith, and Christ has no value to them, because their own works, not Jesus, is saving them.  

That is why he continues in verse 3 that if they submit to circumcision, then they have to keep the whole law.  They have forfeited salvation by grace through faith, and are now trying to earn their salvation.  Paul understands that keeping the whole law as a means of salvation is impossible to do.  

Note:  There are things that we can have a difference of opinion on.  This is not one of them.  We are saved by grace through faith, not through any action that we might perform to somehow earn that salvation.  

A quick summary of what going on here: On one hand the Judaizing teachers were telling the Galatians that circumcision was necessary for salvation.  Paul was telling them that grace, not circumcision, was their means to salvation. So, to those who were considering going under the knife, Paul tells them that if they do this, then they become obligated to obey the whole law, not just circumcision.  If they choose to go with the old law and circumcision, then they must obey all of it perfectly.   

In verse 4, Paul continues his line of thinking.  If they continue down this path, submit to circumcision and choose to obey the old law, then, as they seek to be justified by the law, they separate themselves from Christ and they lose out on his grace.  Paul offers two warnings about what happens if they give in to these teachers and allow themselves to be circumcised: 

1st warning:  κατηργήθητε (katērgēthēte) has numerous different meanings, including “make powerless, invalidate, waste, abolish, wipe out and set aside.”  In my own translation, I went with “set aside.”  They would be choosing to set Christ and his grace aside. 

2nd warning. Ἐξεπέσατε (exepesate) - It is usually translated as 'fallen away.'  It also can have numerous different meanings, including “fall, drift off course, fail, weaken, lose.”  With the context here, “lose” seemed the most appropriate.  If the Galatians were going to rely on their obedience to the law, then they lose out on the grace of God. 

Back in Paul said in 3:10-11, “For those who base their righteousness on works of the Law are under a curse.  It is written, “Those who fail to obey all that is written in the book of the law are under a curse.” It is obvious that the Law does not make anyone righteous before God, instead, “the righteous will live by faith.” In those two verses he drew from OT passages (Deut. 27:26, and Hab. 2:4) to make his point that it is actually impossible for us to truly obey all of the law.  Paul has been making the point that the Law doesn’t make us righteous, but rather our righteousness comes from our faith.  

He has circled back to this in 5:4.  Those who are intent on basing their righteousness on obedience to the Law are under a curse because it is impossible to do, and now they have set Christ and grace aside.  

In verse 5 Paul gives us an alternative to obeying all of the law as mentioned in verse 4. Instead of gaining righteousness through keeping the law, we await the hope of righteousness through the Spirit and faith.  

In 5 the pronouns change.  He has been saying ‘you,’ but in verse 5 it becomes ‘we.’  ‘You have set Christ aside.’  ‘You lose out on grace.’ and then ‘we await the hope of righteousness.’  

Paul has repeatedly presented two different ways of thinking.  One is legalistic and self-reliant, and the other is grace-filled and God-reliant.  He has made very clear arguments that the second one is far better than the first, and while the Galatians have been busy flirting with the first option, Paul and those with him remain with the second, far superior option. 

So, we cannot make ourselves righteous.  Righteousness, according to verse 5 needs two things:  1) it comes through the Spirit, and 2) it comes through our faith.

  

Free!

Hello everyone.

In our study of Galatians, we have finished chapter 4 and are now ready to dive into chapter 5.  Today we will talk about verse 1.  "It is for freedom, that Christ has set us free. We should stand firm then, and never again submit ourselves to the yoke of slavery." 

 Galatians 5:1 serves as a conclusion to the previous section, and an introduction to what is coming in the next section.  So, it acts as a bridge from one point to the next and at the same time sums up much of what he has been saying, along with a short statement about Jesus' redemptive work.  Jesus did not die on the Cross so that we would be enslaved again.  Jesus came so that we could enjoy freedom. 

By Galatians 5, Paul has spent a considerable amount of time establishing that we are free.  The whole Abraham, Sarah and Hagar argument was used to establish Christ’s followers as children of freedom, not slavery.  

So, as Paul moves on from the Abraham allegory, he states that it is for freedom that Christ has set us free (5:1), and they should not allow anyone subject them to slavery again.  This is what Paul has been saying to the Galatians for at least the last few verses of chapter 4, but honestly this has been the message since the beginning of this letter.  Legalism is slavery, and grace is freedom. 

The message of the agitators, with its intense focus on obedience to the law, works against grace and freedom. It is likely that the Judaizing teachers were stressing the point that real discipleship would involve circumcision and a commitment to the Old Law, but Paul argued the opposite, and claimed that a return to the Old Law was submitting again to slavery.  

The Point: religious legalism binds, and cannot set us free.  In my own experience, it creates a system in which I can never measure up to, and therefore, I am constantly discouraged. It doesn’t feel free.  But, again, Jesus didn’t die so that people would be bound all over again, and feel guilty all the time.  Jesus died to set people free.   

What does this freedom that Jesus has given us mean?  What are we free from? John Stott describes this freedom like this, “ What Christ has done in liberating us…is not so much to set us free from the bondage of sin as to set our conscience free from the guilt of sin.”  (Stott, 132.)  A little later, he says, “we are to enjoy the glorious freedom of conscience which Christ brought us by His forgiveness.  We must not lapse into the idea that we have to win our acceptance with God by our own obedience.” (Stott, 132.) 

I have learned a few things about this from reading David Benner’s book Surrender to Love. Benner ties genuine freedom to truly understanding God’s love.  He says, “Created from love and for love, humans…spurned God’s love in favor of what was perceived to be freedom.  The result, of course, was disastrous.  Liberty was instantly replaced by bondage, intimacy by alienation.”  (Benner, 27.)  

Benner is saying this within the context of the Creation, and Adam and Eve’s sin.  They chose that perceived freedom over God’s love, just as we have at various times in our life, chosen sin over God’s love.  The principle remains, even for the deeply religious.  When we make our relationship with God about our obedience, rather than God' s overwhelming love, we are trying to earn our way, and we lose the freedom that God had intended for us to have.  

Benner says something a little later on that helps me keep perspective: “The fact that I am deeply loved by God is increasingly the core of my identity, what I know about myself with most confidence.  Such a conviction is, I am convinced, the foundation of any significant Christian Spiritual growth."  

That is the thing that I am seeing here.  Paul is not down on obedience.  Neither should we be.  But, we should be obedient because we understand God’s love, not the other way around.  God’s love is not conditional upon our obedience.  He will love whether we are obedient or not.  Therefore, we don’t trust in our own obedience, we need to trust in His love.  I, certainly, will fail to measure up, (you likely will too), but that doesn’t negate God's love.  We don’t have to live in guilt all the time, and understanding that is liberating.  

Benner says:  “He offers us something we could never deserve - forgiveness of our sins and his embrace of love.  What makes grace so amazing is that it and it alone can free us from our fears and make us truly whole and free.  Surrender to God’s love offers us the possibility of freedom from guilt, from effort to earn God’s approval, and freedom to genuinely love God and others as the Father loves us.” (Benner, 47.) 

In the second half of verse 1, Paul again compares what the Judaizers are offering to slavery. He says that the Galatians should never allow themselves to be taken back to a state of slavery, but that is exactly what they are doing by submitting to the teachings of these agitators, particularly their teachings on circumcision.  

At this point, in his commentary, Stott asks why Paul is making such a big deal about these guys submitting to circumcision.  Stott answers his own question, pointing out that it is not the act of circumcision itself.   The problem is the doctrinal implications that arise from it.  The false teachers were advocating circumcision as necessary for salvation.  (Acts 15:1) Circumcision here becomes a symbol for “a particular type of religion, namely salvation by good works, in obedience to the law.” (Stott, 133.) 

If salvation comes through obedience, then it does not come by faith, through grace. That idea is something we have to remember.  Of course, we should be obedient, but it is not the obedience that sets us free, it is acceptance of God's grace. 

Children of Freedom

 Greetings everyone 

We will finish up chapter 4 today, as Paul concludes his Abrahamic argument for The Promise and Grace, and against the Law.  Here is my translation of verses 28-31: 

28 But you, brothers and sisters, just like Isaac, are children of the promise.  29 But, just as it was then, the one born of the flesh persecuted the one born of the Spirit. That is how it is now, too. 30 What does it say in the Scriptures? “Drive out the slave and her son, because the son of the slave will not inherit alongside the son born to freedom.” 31 So, brothers and sisters, we are not children of slavery, but children of freedom. 

He concludes his argument regarding freedom in Christ, sandwiching his conclusion between two statements that they were ‘children of the Promise”, in both verses 28 and 31. In verse 28, we are compared to Isaac.  Like him, we are children of the Promise.  We are not born into the slavery of the Law.  This is the message Paul has been presenting to the Galatians.  We, followers of Jesus, are of the Promise, and not the Law.

Paul, then, makes a comparison, without naming either one, between the Judaizing teachers and Ishmael.  In Genesis 21, the teenaged Ishamel mocks the infant Isaac, and ultimately is cast out, along with his mother, for it.  The Judaizing teachers are Ishmael in the comparison, persecuting true disciples.  According to Paul, Ishmael and the Judaizing teachers, and their brand of Christianity are those born of the flesh, while Isaac and true disciples of Jesus are those born of the Spirit.  

Back in Genesis, Sarah is very direct to Abraham, as she says in Genesis 21:10 (NIV), “Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac.”  God backs Sarah up on this.  Isaac, not Ishamel, was the child of the Promise. The implication from Paul here is, “Get rid of these teachers, and their false gospel. They do not share in the Promise with you.” 

Paul wraps up this the discussion of Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, Ishamael and Isaac with a reminder of which side of this argument they belonged on.  They were children of freedom, not slavery. They needed to live like it, and not spend their lives bound up by the Law. Likewise, we are children of the Promise, and we are not destined to be bound up by legalistic righteousness.  The plan for us is to be free in Christ,