Galatians 1:6-10
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.
DEFINITION
Vs 7 Trouble - ταράσσω tarassō: to stir or agitate (roil water): — trouble.
to agitate, trouble (a thing, by the movement of its parts to and fro)to cause one inward commotion, take away his calmness of mind, to disquiet, make restless, to stir up, to trouble, to strike one's spirit with fear and dread, to render anxious or distressed, to perplex the mind of one by suggesting scruples or doubts
Vs 9 Accursed - ἀνάθεμα anathema: a (religious) ban or (concretely) excommunicated (thing or person)
a thing set up or laid by in order to be kept specifically, an offering resulting from a vow, which after being consecrated to a god was hung upon the walls or columns of the temple, or put in some other conspicuous place, a thing devoted to God without hope of being redeemed, and if an animal, to be slain; therefore a person or thing doomed to destruction, a curse, a man accursed, devoted to the direst of woes
COMMENT
One of the thoughts that has often occurred to me is this, If only 20 to 40 years after the death of Christ, there were already those who were needing to be corrected in their doctrine, why is it that so many people, with so many different thoughts, all think they are correct over 2,000 years later?
Paul starts this section by stating that those who have turned to this different gospel have deserted Christ. That is a powerful statement. As I understand what Paul is addressing here, it is the thought that in addition to the sacrifice that Jesus gave on our behalf, obedience to certain laws was also necessary. (1:15-21, so more on that later.) To hold to such a belief is to believe that the sacrifice of Christ alone was not sufficient for salvation. I believe that this, at least in part, preys upon the the feeling that there must be something we have to do in order to deserve salvation. It is hard to believe that God would freely give such a wonderful gift. Paul says that those who think this way have deserted Christ. He goes on to give a reason why these men would teach such a thing: to trouble us and to distort the gospel. Let's take a look at the word trouble, because it carries a lot of meaning here. The word means "to stir or agitate. The picture given is calm water that is disturbed such as by throwing a rock in it. That rock removes the calmness of the entire body of water. It agitates it. Think about our spirit when it gets agitated. It fears, it gets short, it can cause doubt and a number of other issues. This goal is accomplished when we give in to the idea that in addition to what Jesus has done to save us, we also must do something to save our soul. That in addition to our faith, we must (fill in the blank with any number of things that could apply, not limited to drinking alcohol, Bible study, prayer, communion, baptism, cursing, etc. etc. etc.)
He then ups the consequence even more by saying that if anyone, including himself or even an angel, should preach a gospel contrary to the one they first received, they should be accursed. This word carries with it some dire meaning: Excommunication, no hope of redemption. So this is not just Paul acting like a witch, throwing out a spell on an individual, it is Paul saying that a person such as this stands condemned before God! Let me state that more clearly: If someone requires external obedience as a requirement for salvation other than faith, they stand condemned.
Paul knew that these words would be offensive, and he did not care! (Think Ricky Gervaise at the last Golden Globes.) He could not care, for if he did he would not be preaching the truth and would himself be in danger of damnation. Verse 10 shows that he is not saying this with the goal of seeking to please men, for if that were his goal, he would not be a servant of Christ.
Watch the video below. Then look at the questions and comments that follow.
a thing set up or laid by in order to be kept specifically, an offering resulting from a vow, which after being consecrated to a god was hung upon the walls or columns of the temple, or put in some other conspicuous place, a thing devoted to God without hope of being redeemed, and if an animal, to be slain; therefore a person or thing doomed to destruction, a curse, a man accursed, devoted to the direst of woes
COMMENT
One of the thoughts that has often occurred to me is this, If only 20 to 40 years after the death of Christ, there were already those who were needing to be corrected in their doctrine, why is it that so many people, with so many different thoughts, all think they are correct over 2,000 years later?
Paul starts this section by stating that those who have turned to this different gospel have deserted Christ. That is a powerful statement. As I understand what Paul is addressing here, it is the thought that in addition to the sacrifice that Jesus gave on our behalf, obedience to certain laws was also necessary. (1:15-21, so more on that later.) To hold to such a belief is to believe that the sacrifice of Christ alone was not sufficient for salvation. I believe that this, at least in part, preys upon the the feeling that there must be something we have to do in order to deserve salvation. It is hard to believe that God would freely give such a wonderful gift. Paul says that those who think this way have deserted Christ. He goes on to give a reason why these men would teach such a thing: to trouble us and to distort the gospel. Let's take a look at the word trouble, because it carries a lot of meaning here. The word means "to stir or agitate. The picture given is calm water that is disturbed such as by throwing a rock in it. That rock removes the calmness of the entire body of water. It agitates it. Think about our spirit when it gets agitated. It fears, it gets short, it can cause doubt and a number of other issues. This goal is accomplished when we give in to the idea that in addition to what Jesus has done to save us, we also must do something to save our soul. That in addition to our faith, we must (fill in the blank with any number of things that could apply, not limited to drinking alcohol, Bible study, prayer, communion, baptism, cursing, etc. etc. etc.)
He then ups the consequence even more by saying that if anyone, including himself or even an angel, should preach a gospel contrary to the one they first received, they should be accursed. This word carries with it some dire meaning: Excommunication, no hope of redemption. So this is not just Paul acting like a witch, throwing out a spell on an individual, it is Paul saying that a person such as this stands condemned before God! Let me state that more clearly: If someone requires external obedience as a requirement for salvation other than faith, they stand condemned.
Paul knew that these words would be offensive, and he did not care! (Think Ricky Gervaise at the last Golden Globes.) He could not care, for if he did he would not be preaching the truth and would himself be in danger of damnation. Verse 10 shows that he is not saying this with the goal of seeking to please men, for if that were his goal, he would not be a servant of Christ.
Watch the video below. Then look at the questions and comments that follow.
- She "grew up in the church," and believes that the people in the audience are getting frustrated with the speaker. But shouldn't this be the case? Doesn't 1 Cor 1:23 tell us that Christ crucified is a stumbling block? Phil 3:18, that many walk as enemies of the cross? Should the level of audience frustration determine our message?
- She states that "You're not portraying the kind of God that people need." Which is to say, it is not about God, but it is about a god that will be acceptable to these people, a god whom they will embrace because it satisfies them, and not because He is the holy God of the universe. Is she asking the preacher to tell them what they want to hear to gain their acceptance? (see 1 Timothy 4:3)
- She states that she thinks the speaker and her believe the same thing, but I don't think so. Do you?
- She states that she evangelizes the way that Jesus did it. But I wonder if this is not a matter of her own perception or desire rather than a matter of truth. If all Jesus ever did was live a good life and try not to offend people, why did they crucify him?
- In response to his comment that we are commanded to preach the gospel, she adds, "And live it." Is this true? And if so, what does it look like? In light of what is taught in Galatians, is this not an addition to the gospel?
- She wants to make his his conversion rate an issue. Should it be? (See 1 Cor 3:7,8)
- She states that "This doesn't make people want to accept the gospel." If this is correct, and I would agree that it often is, can we change the message in order to get people to accept it? If we do, what are some of the consequences?
This woman is sincere. So are a lot of other people. I appreciate her sincerity and passion. But is she right, is she dealing in truth? Emotions do not determine right. If they did, we wouldn't need Scripture, would we?
No comments:
Post a Comment