GALATIANS -- Chapter 2
Introduction:
1. Paul continues to show that he maintained his independence from
apostles.
2. A space of 17 years (14 + 3) had passed since his conversion
and still he had not seen the apostles, except Peter, for a
very short period (15 days).
3. Outline of Chapter Two:
I. The account of his visit to Jerusalem (vs 1-10).
II. The scene at Antioch where Paul rebuked Peter (11-21).
(vs 1) A total of 17 years after his conversion he returned to
Jerusalem.
Paul and Barnabas sent by the church. Note Acts 15:1.
This was after Paul's first missionary journey:
Churches in Galatian already established before Paul
associated with the apostles.
The dispute was the same as that which troubled the Galatian
brethren now.
(vs 2) "by revelation" -- God desired him to go. Not to receive any
new instructions. He did not go of his own accord to
consult with the apostles about his message.
This does not suggest that Paul was not sure of his message.
But for the minds of others.
"running" Characteristic of Paul's writings; stadium, races.
(vs 3) The case of Titus clearly showed how that circumcision was not
necessary to please God now.
An example of one who met with the apostles. If circumcision
were necessary, then Titus would have been compelled.
"Being a Greek" Parents both Gentiles
"compelled" They demanded and insisted upon it (circumcision)
for fellowship. This settled the question when Paul
resisted their demand. Even under pressure, Titus was not
circumcised.
Acts 15:5--group exerting pressure.
cf. Case of Timothy--Acts 16:3, A Jew. Yet, not compelled by
others.
(vs 4) "false brethren" Judaizing Christians, those who claimed to be
Christians, yet, they hung to the Law.
Same as those in Galatia at the time Paul was writing.
"spy out" -- not true soldiers, but spies. Seeking to bring
about destruction.
"liberty" -- from rites of the Law of Moses.
FREEDOM --General theme of the book: Freedom from the Law
This theme will be mentioned often.
"bondage" -- of the Law.
(vs 5) Paul and the apostles did not comply to their desires, not for
even an hour. Not at all!!! Not for a moment!!! We
opposed them.
"truth of the gospel" -- When the gospel was presented in its
truthfulness, it did not include the relicts of the Law;
the Law was no longer binding upon mankind. The Law had
been nailed to the cross, taken out of the way. The
Gospel is free from the Law.
(vs 6) Refers to the leaders of the church in Jerusalem.
NOTE: Acts 10:34; Romans 2:11. What a great truth!! God does
not look upon one's rank, popularity, position, etc.,
that man may recognize. He looks upon the heart.
External rank is no rule to measure by.
However important the apostles were, Paul did not need them to
tell him what to do. His instructions came from Heaven.
NOTE: All of the apostles were of equal rank and authority.
Just because Peter was chosen to proclaim that first
gospel message, did not elevate him above the
others.
(vs 7) Not another, or different gospel, but the same gospel to
different people. Same source, different backgrounds.
Not different in characteristics--same gospel.
Different audiences; one Jewish; other Gentiles.
Paul was appointed to a particular task. Cf. 1:16.
"Peter" -- singled out possibly because he was the more popular
of the apostles. He had been given the responsibility of
presenting the first message to both Jew and Gentile.
(vs 8) The same God-- same source of authority; same message.
God called them both into the office of an apostle.
Yet, they had separate missions, Jew and Gentile.
No difference in the message which they preached--from God.
(vs 9) The leaders in the Jerusalem church accepted Paul's authority.
"grace" -- unmerited favor of Christ. Paul had been specially
favored. 1 Tim 1:12-17. Acts 9:1-19.
"right hands" -- public acknowledgment as a fellow-worker.
No jealousies or strife, but harmony.
Apostles accept him as a co-worker.
(vs 10) Most likely the poor Jews in Judea.
This would draw the Gentiles and Jews closer together.
Paul would go to the Gentiles, but he was not to forget the
Jews.
There was a deep spiritual union between brethren.
cf. Romans 15:25-27; 1 Cor. 16:1-5
II. THE SCENE AT ANTIOCH WHERE PAUL WITHSTOOD PETER (vs 11-21)
Probably happened soon after -- as wording suggests
The reason Paul brings this subject up is to show that he,
Paul, regarded himself as on a level with the chief apostles
Paul did not hesitate to resist Peter when he was wrong.
Also, the thing which Peter was condemned for was the same
thing as Paul was trying to get across to the Galatians.
Paul had defended the same doctrine in the presence of Peter.
It was done openly, publicly.
Paul did not whisper or undermine Peter, but went to him.
cf. Today -- Often members talk behind the backs of others.
1 Tim. 5:11-13 -- Paul warns against this evil.
(vs 11) "Cephas" Peter
"resisted" --In the matter being discussed.
"stood condemned" -- his actions condemned him.
(vs 12) Peter had been taught in Acts 10 (Conversion of Cornelius)
that all men were equal.
While no Jews were around he mixed with the Gentiles. Acting
as he was taught and should, at first.
But, when Jews came, he changed his actions.
Feared their opposition.
Feared a report of his actions to Jerusalem.
An illustration of Peter's character:
sinking on the waves,
denying the Lord
Peter acted the part of a hypocrite.
"of the circumcision" --Jews, but this might also suggest that
these were attempting to bind circumcision on Gentiles.
(vs 13) Converted Jews. They followed the leadership of Peter.
The conduct of Peter influenced Barnabas also.
May possibly have been the basis of the later split between
Paul and Barnabas; although John Mark entered into it.
Peter, under pressure, sells out everything that he had once
stood for.
(vs 14) They swerved from the straight path. The narrow road.
"According to the truth of the gospel,"
The gospel did not permit such conduct.
"Before them all" -- done openly, the Church's welfare was at
stake. Paul was not ashamed to rebuke publicly,
1 Tim. 5:20.
Peter's mistake was not one of ignorance.
NOTE: What about Matt. 18:15-20. That seems to be a private
problem between one brother and another brother.
This is a public matter. This was know to all. Thus
drastic measures were taken.
NOTE: Suppose Paul would have reasoned, "This might hurt
Peter's feelings." Or, "Maybe I will lose the
respect and support of the Jews."
The very heart of the gospel was been challenged. "Go ye
into ALL THE WORLD and preach the gospel." The
message was for all mankind on equal footing.
Peter had forsook the Jewish law when eating with Gentiles,
then turns right around and tries to bind the Law on the
Gentiles. Eat with them on one occasion, and then turn
right around and seek to bind circumcision on them.
(vs 15) BEGINS THE HEART OF THE EPISTLE:
"JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH AND NOT BY WORKS OF THE LAW"
NOTE: Many scholars seem to think that this continues to be
addressed to Peter. cf. 3:1 -- "O foolish Gentiles"
(vs 15) "By nature" -- Born Jews, of the race of the Jews.
"not sinners" -- does not mean that they could not sin, but
that they were not left wholly ignorant of God's desires
Not born under the disadvantages of the Gentiles in
regard to the true knowledge of the way of salvation.
The Jew, because of his natural birth, had many advantages
over the Gentiles with reference to Jehovah.
(vs 16) "Yet," (K.J.--"knowing") even so, with this basis he draws a
conclusion.
They were Jews, having the Law, but even so they had to
accept Christ in the same way that the Gentiles
(without the law) did.
(No written Law) Gentiles----(=)----Jews (Law of Moses)
³ ³
³ Christians ³
(Children of God)
Both Jew and Gentile must accept the same plan.
The works of the Law could not justify the doer. Heb 10:2-12
Romans 3:20.
Circumcision was a work of the Law; could not save.
"through faith" the basis of salvation is faith in Christ, not
compliance to the law (circumcision, feast days, etc.)
The "works of the law" did not justified when the
Law was still binding, and neither could they now.
(vs 17) While under the Law of Moses they were to keep the ceremonial
parts of that Law (circumcision, feast days, etc.)
Justification through faith in Christ taught no necessity of
keeping the rituals of the Law.
Therefore, to seek justification by faith, while at the same
seeking to bind the rituals of the law (circumcision,
etc.) places them in a sinful condition; Does this make
Christ the "minister of sin"? For it is Christ who said
you are not to keep the Law, it was nailed to the cross.
"God forbid"-- Christ is not a sin-promoter. Our sins are not
to be blamed on the Lord. Christ gives the standard of
righteousness by showing what we should and should not
do. When we do those things we should not do, is it
Christ's fault. God forbid.
(vs 18) If they sought to reinstate the ceremonies of the Law; the
very things which were nailed to the cross, then they
would become a transgressor.
After receiving and accepting Jesus, one then returns to the
old ways and life, that one is a transgressor.
By obeying Christ, they had done away with the relics of the
Law; but to go back and bring in circumcision, makes them
transgressors.
(vs 19) It was through the Law that Christ was revealed. 2 Tim. 3:15.
The law also identified Paul as a sinner. Thus, the Law placed
a curse on man (cf. 3:13), showed him to be a sinner, yet
gave no remedy. (note vs. 21)
As Paul was brought to Christ, it became evident that he must
give up the rituals of the law, "died to the law."
No longer under the Law, he now is under Christ, in service to
God.
(vs 20) Christ was crucified, died to the Law.
Paul also dies to the Law, was crucified.
Obviously, Paul was not nailed literally to the cross with
Christ. Thus, how??? He answer in Rom. 6:3,6. The
old man of sin was put away, crucified.
Paul died to the law, with Christ. As Christ was
resurrected, so was Paul, to newness of life.
NOTE: Here is union, "with Christ in death," "with Christ
in life."
NOTE: Paul became a personal benefactor of Christ's death;
YET, It was not against or contrary to Paul's will.
Paul had accepted and responded to the commands of
Christ. Acts 22:16. So, did Christ die for each of
us, but we, too, must obey Him to benefit from His
death on the cross.
"liveth" -- Note the progressive tense ("ETH"). a continuing
relationship. Serving God is never a past tense.
cf. 1 John 1:7 (cleanseth); 2:4,5 (keepeth);
2:6 (abideth); 2:9 (loveth); 2:14 (abideth);
etc.
"flesh" -- Our service to God is while we are in the flesh.
NOTE: The flesh can be controlled. 1 Cor 9:27--Paul
buffeted the flesh. Those are wrong who say, "I just
couldn't help it," etc. "The Devil made me do it."
"in faith" -- How does Christ live in us? Through faith.
NOTE: (1) The Father dwells in the Christian (1 Jn 2:12-)
(2) Christ dwells in the Christian (Phil. 1:27).
(3) The Holy spirit dwells in the Christian
(2 Tim. 1:14).
How is this possible? BY FAITH!!!
(1) Eph. 3:17 -- Christ dwells in us by Faith.
(2) Gal. 3:2 -- The Spirit is received by the
hearing of faith.
Thus, the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit
dwells in the Christian as one hears, learns,
believes and obeys the words of the Spirit as
revealed in the New Testament.
"loved me" -- John 14:13--No greater love.
Same love as the Father, John 3:16.
God's love is interwoven throughout the Scriptures.
"gave himself" -- His whole life was a sacrificial offering for
man. Phil. 25-8.
"for me" -- personal application. Christ died for me!!!!!
Freed us for the Law, the system of law. There is no
justification in law.
(vs 21) Peter and those who were drawn away by him were beginning to
nullify the grace of God by demanding compliance to the
Law, circumcision, feast days, etc.
To go back to the law would make void the grace of God.
If justification comes through the Law, then the death of
Christ was for nothing. Christ need not die if one could
be justified by law. But, law cannot be kept perfectly.
Thus the need for grace, the need for Christ.
Return to Index
Home