This morning we are beginning a study of Paul’s letter to the Galatians. Our approach will sometimes be a little different. I won’t always preach a sermon on the text; instead, we may read the text and try to follow Paul’s argument as the deals with a serious problem in a church he founded on his first missionary journey.
Salutation
1 Paul an apostle—sent neither by human commission nor
from human authorities, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised
him from the dead— 2 and all the members of God’s family who
are with me,
Although
it is not certain most Bible scholars seem to believe this was one of the
earliest, it not the earliest of Paul’s epistles. I and II Thessalonians are sometimes
suggested as being earlier. If this is
Paul’s earliest letter, it would have been written sometime between 48 and
50. A few others believe it could have
been written during the mid-50’s.
This
was a time of change and challenge for the church. The face of the church was changing as more
and more Gentiles entered the ranks of the believers. Inevitably, there would be tensions and
conflicts as former enemies attempted to worship together. The letter will address one of those areas of
tension, perhaps the most important.
Paul
stresses his call as an “apostle.” The
title and position were not conferred upon him by any human agency. Jesus Christ called him (Acts 9). The fact that Paul mentions this probably
means his authority is being challenged.
In any case, due to the nature of the crisis addressed in Galatians,
Paul will find it necessary to stress his authority as an apostle.
To
the churches of Galatia:
Galatia is an area
roughly identifiable with central Asia Minor, eastern Turkey. Scholars have long debated about what part of
Galatia was home to the church to which Paul wrote. The northern region, which was historically
known as Galatia, was populated with people with Celtic roots while the
southern region, part of the Roman province of Galatia, was populated with
peoples of Phrygian background. People
in the north tended to live in the open country; people in the south tended to
live in the cities. The question of
which region Paul was addressing has a bearing on dating Galatians. Most scholars tend to believe he was writing
Christians in southern Galatia.
3 Grace
to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, 4 who
gave himself for our sins to set us free from the present evil age, according
to the will of our God and Father, 5 to whom be the glory
forever and ever. Amen.
So
far Paul doesn’t seem to be doing anything out of the ordinary. The prayer for “grace and peace” to be on the
Galatians was the blending of a common Jewish greeting, “shalom,” and a common
Greek greeting, “grace.” However, Paul
stresses that such blessings come from God and are associated with the work of
Jesus.
In
fact, he stresses the unity and equality of “God our Father and the Lord Jesus
Christ.” Paul further identifies this
Jesus as the one whose sacrificial death has liberated the Galatians form the
power of “the present evil age,” a
reference to the Jewish custom of dividing history into two parts: the evil age of anarchy and rebellion against
God and the age of God’s unchallenged rule (Keener). Because of Jesus’ work (fully endorsed by the
Father) Christians may have a foretaste of that new age of God’s victory and
rule.
The
notion that things have changed because of Jesus is an important one in the New
Testament. It may be expressed differently
by different writers or in different metaphors by the same writer but it seems
clear that entering into a relationship with Jesus ignites a spiritual
revolution.
--In
John, believing in Jesus gives eternal life (the life of the age to come) in
the here and now (John 10:10).
--John
(8:31) will also stress the freedom Jesus gives.
--Later,
Paul will use another image to stress the change Jesus makes in our lives when
he tells the Colossians that God, through Jesus, has “delivered us from the
Kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of light.”
(Col 1:13-14)
As
we will see, it will be very important for the Galatians to recall what Jesus
did for them and how effectively he did it.
At
this point in most first century letters, the writer would use a few lines to
praise and commend the recipients of the letter. A writer might even offer a word of thanks
for them. Consider Paul writing to the
Philippians:
Every time I think of you, I thank
my God.
And whenever I mention you in my
prayers, it makes me happy.
For some writers this
might have been a mere courtesy but we can give Paul the benefit of the doubt
and assume he truly meant the words of commendation and gratitude he expressed
toward his fellow believers. He could
even say to the troublesome Corinthians:
I give thanks to my God always for you because of the grace of God that was
given you in Christ Jesus….
What note of thanks does
he offer for the Galatians? What good
thing does he say about them? Not a
word. Nothing. It wasn’t unprecedented for a letter-writer
to omit these complementary words but when they were omitted it usually meant
the writer felt impassioned about something, angry. And Paul was angry. This anger is going to rise to the surface
several times in the letter. Why was he
so angry? We’ll answer that as we move
ahead.
There
Is No Other Gospel
6 I
am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you in the
grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 not
that there is another gospel,
The New Living
Translation puts Paul’s words more pointedly:
I am shocked that you are turning
away so soon from God… Paul is
shocked, stunned at the Galatians infidelity.
Some believe this defection may have taken place within weeks of
Paul’s ministering in the region.
Notice that Paul isn’t
saying they have betrayed him or been unfaithful to him—he was merely the preacher
who brought the gospel to them. Rather,
they have been unfaithful to the God “who called [them] to himself through the
loving mercy of Christ.”
The holy God came among
in them in the person of Jesus Christ, filled with love, mercy, generosity, and
grace but they turned their backs on him by turning to “a different
gospel.” Paul is quick to point out that
there really is not “another gospel.” There is only one gospel, the message of
good news, and the message that the Galatians were embracing was certainly not
good news.
Why did they do such a thing?
…there are some who are confusing you and
want to pervert the gospel of Christ.
They
had fallen prey to false teachers who were slick and able to confuse the unwary
Galatians. They should have known better
but these false teachers may have added a note of flattery to their words,
making them more palatable.
In
any case, the Galatians failed to see the teachers aim was “to pervert the
gospel of Christ.” They twisted the
gospel so that it was almost unrecognizable.
Unfortunately, the Galatians failed to see that. Paul will address their blindness later.
For
now, he has some strong words for those false teachers and for any who would
copy them.
8 But
even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to
what we proclaimed to you, let that one be accursed! 9 As we
have said before, so now I repeat, if anyone proclaims to you a gospel contrary
to what you received, let that one be accursed!
Throughout
the Scripture, angels are God’s special agents, his messengers. They spoke to Abraham, to Joshua, to the
prophets, to those involved in the Christmas story. Yet, Paul says, even if an angel should
present a “gospel” different than the one we preached, don’t listen. Paul says, if for some reason we come among
you with a different gospel—telling you we’ve changed our minds—don’t
listen. No matter who “proclaims to you
a gospel contrary to what you received, let that one be accursed!”
That
is a powerful statement. The NET
translates the statement this way, “let him be condemned to hell!” As strong as that language is, that’s the
implication of Paul’s words and a clue to how seriously he took the issue of
abandoning the gospel.
10 Am I now seeking human approval, or God’s approval? Or am
I trying to please people? If I were still pleasing people, I would not be a
servant of Christ.
Paul
ends this section with what might seem a strange comment. Think of it this way: he is saying that he
isn’t trying to win friends; he refuses to temper his words because the issue
is just that important. In fact, if he
were to take the matter less seriously, he would be betraying his calling.
SO WHAT WAS THE BIG DEAL?
Just who were these
false teachers who inspired such passion in the apostle? A little over a
hundred years ago, many New Testament scholars would have given one clear,
unambiguous answer. Now, it’s not so certain. While it was once thought that Paul’s
opponents came from Jerusalem, that is no longer certain. And, while it was once thought that Paul
faced the same opponents in each place he ministered, most students believe the
opponents differed from place to place.
This required him to continually sharpen his defense of the gospel to
meet a new group of false teachers.
In Galatians, Paul is
facing a group that is often referred to as “Judaizers.” However, that term is imprecise and even
misleading. (It referred to Gentiles attempting to live like Jews.) So, too, is
the term “circumcision party,” for similar reasons. However, it seems clear that circumcision did
play a major role in their teachings.
The Galatians opponents
may have reflected one of two possible positions.
1. They may have been Jewish-Christians who
sought to bring any Gentile converts or near-converts to embrace Judaism. In other words, before you could become a
Christian you had to first become a Jew.
Their motives appear to
have been mixed. They seem to have, in
part, been trying to escape the criticism or their Jewish neighbors and/or the
Jewish authorities.
Craig Keener describes
these individuals as related to those Paul encountered in Acts
These are Jewish Christians who would
rather circumcise the Galatians—thus alienating them from their own Gentile
culture—than allow Judean Jews back home to think that Christian missionaries
were lax (4:29; 5:11; 6:12–13). Unlike Paul, a more seasoned missionary, these
missionaries want to impose their own culture on the Galatians.[1]
2. They may have been Gentile converts.
This view imagines
Gentiles who accepted circumcision because they believe it is integral to their
spiritual welfare. Now, they are
insisting that all their fellow Gentiles must be circumcised if they would
become Christians.
While I think the first
view is the most likely, there is support among New Testament scholars for the
second.
The precise identity of
the group probably doesn’t make a major difference in understanding the gist of
Paul’s case for the gospel. For this
study, I will refer to this group the false teachers, Paul’s opponents, and as
Judaizers, as long as we remember the term does not apply to all of Paul’s
opponents everywhere.
The letter was inspired
by the situation faced by the Galatian Christians who were the special object
of the Judaizers’ attention.
The Christians in that area had become
the object of intense missionary zeal by certain ‘Judaizers’ who were convinced
that the gospel did not set aside the Jewish ceremonies and that, therefore,
the Gentile Christians must become Jews if they were to receive God’s promise
given to Abraham…. Moved by the
Judaizing arguments, these Galatians, who had initially been evangelized by
Paul, began to observe the Jewish ceremonies. The apostle realized that such a
turn of events undermined the very essence of the gospel of grace.[2].
Again, so what?
We
might argue that the Judaizers belonged to another age and another culture that
has nothing to do with us. So, Paul’s
struggle with them is of little consequence to us.
True,
there are no groups going from church to church saying you must become a Jew
before you can be a Christian. But the
spirit that drove the Judaizers is still at work today. That is the spirit of legalism. I decided we needed to review Galatians
because legalism is alive and well and living in our churches today.
Let
me offer an informal definition.
Legalism is that outlook that says spirituality may be achieved by
strictly following a code of conduct that may, at times, exceed any behavior
required in the scripture and observing certain taboos that may find little
support in the Scripture. The one who
follows such a lifestyle often believes he or she has attained a position of
spiritual superiority over other Christians who do not live so
circumspectly. In extreme cases,
legalists believe their way of life actually contributes to their earning God’s
favor.
A
more formal definition comes from The Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms:
Legalism is the attitude that
identifies morality with the strict observance of laws or that views adherence
to moral codes as defining the boundaries of a community. Religious legalism
focuses on obedience to laws or moral codes based on the (misguided) assumption
that such obedience is a means of gaining divine favor.[3]
Again,
the most radical forms of “Christian” legalism says salvation is a matter
of Jesus plus something else, usually
keeping certain rules or performing certain rites.
As
a result, legalism diminishes the role of Jesus in our redemption and robs the
Christian of the joy that ought to come from resting wholly in the work of
Christ on our behalf. The message of
legalism means the “good news” isn’t quite as “good” as it once was. Legalism has the capacity of transforming our
relationship with others; acts of kindness are never performed out of sheer
benevolence, they are done to enhance my standing with God.
If
the fundamental notion of legalism is true—I can contribute to my own salvation—almost
everything Paul preached and wrote about in the New Testament is suspect.
Legalism
is insidious; it can wheedle its way into our thinking without our knowing
it. A few years ago, an evangelical who
is known for holding some very liberal positions on certain social issues
addressed a convention of WMU women. He
told them that no real Christian would wear a Rolex. Now, this man knows you can’t make such a
judgment about a fellow Christian, but a kind of “liberal legalism” had found a
place in his heart, probably without his knowing it. Amazingly, he was praised for what he said;
praised, perhaps, by Baptist journalists wearing Timexes.
Liberalism
exploits our fears and worries. Legalism
may be more prevalent when society seems to be out of control. We feel we need to build stronger walls to
protect ourselves.
--The
legalist may mishandle the Scripture in deciding right and wrong. This happens
when someone says, “No real Christian drinks alcohol.” While the Bible condemns
drunkenness, it does not forbid drinking alcohol.
--The
legalist may issue non-biblical rules to define Christian behavior. For example, “No real Christian goes to the
theatre.”
It
may seem trivial but Paul knows where such legalism will lead. As we will see, the spirit of legalism is a
spirit of bondage. Paul wants the
Galatians (and us) to understand why the gospel is so important. Get the gospel right and you are liberated. Get the “gospel” wrong and are enslaved. Paul’s examination of what God has done in
Christ will lead him to the conclusion that begins the “practical” or ethical
section of the letter. He says,
“For freedom Christ has set us
free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.”Galatians
5:1 (NRSV)
That’s
an important verse. It is why I’m
calling this “A Study in Christian Freedom.”
In contrast to the way of legalism, Paul will offer the way of
grace. He will show that the way of
grace as the foundation for a relationship with God was God’s idea all
along. And he will show that the life
inspired by God’s grace is one that bears fruit far better than the life of
rules and taboos.
But
first he will have to convince his readers he has the right to make those
claims.
[1] Keener, C. S. (1993). The IVP Bible
background commentary: New Testament (Ga). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press.
[2]
New Bible commentary: 21st century edition. 1994 (D. A. Carson, R. T. France,
J. A. Motyer & G. J. Wenham, Ed.) (4th ed.). Leicester, England; Downers
Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press.
[3]
Grenz, S., Guretzki, D., & Nordling, C. F. (1999). Pocket
dictionary of theological terms (72). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
