False Brothers (Galatians 2:4-10)

SCRIPTURE

Galatians 2:4-10

Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery— to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. And from those who seemed to be influential (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—those, I say, who seemed influential added nothing to me. On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.

LANGUAGE

Vs 4 False brother - pretend associate

Vs 4 Secretly - to come alongside stealthily

COMMENT

False brothers. That is a tough term. Those who come in and act as your friends, but have an agenda. The agenda in this case was to spy on their freedom. Humans tend to be a jealous lot. When someone has something, we think we should too. Just look at the socialist agenda that so many are chasing. It is not fair that the rich have more than us, they should be made to not only pay their share, but more so since they have more. The rich on the other hand, do all they can to hold on to what they have, looking for loopholes in tax laws or other ways to take advantage of the system. So when these Jews saw that the followers of Jesus were no longer being bound by the Jewish laws, they were jealous. Since they had to follow the laws, so should everyone. Since everyone who seeks to follow the law is slave to the law, they wanted to "bring us into slavery" (Vs 4) with them. 

The law enslaves. It tells us what to do.Grace sets us free. Free to do what we want to do. Which for the Christian, looks insanely different than it does for the rest of the world. The rest of the world sees freedom as an invitation to do whatever it wants, whatever feels good. And the world wants joy, power, security. It finds those things in sex, alcohol, possessions, control. The Christian wants joy, power, and security too, those truly converted just find it in a different place, they find it in Jesus. Our joy is now found in serving Him. Our power is not the power of controlling others but in following Jesus and seeking to serve Him by how we treat others. Our security is found in His love for us, starting with how he loved us while we were sinners and continuing in our childlike efforts to love Him still. 

John Piper has a term he calls "Christian Hedonism." I am sure a lot of Christians don't like that term because they see hedonism as the selfish pursuit of pleasure. But isn't hedonism the pursuit of joy at all costs? Isn't that what the lover of God is pursuing when no matter the circumstance, they can praise God because through it all, God's love is greater than our circumstance? Why did Paul and Silas sing praises while in chains? It was not because they loved torture. It was because they had been counted worthy of suffering for the sake of Christ. Joy like that does not disappear when the money runs out.

Still Making Sure (Galatians 2:1-3)

SCRIPTURE

Galatians 2:1-3
Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek.

COMMENT

Paul was a confident and bold speaker, so these words come as a bit of a surprise to me. After 14 years of preaching, after a sudden and amazing turn around on the road to Damascus, after all of the hardships Paul had endured for the cross, did he really feel the need to make sure that he was on the right path? It appears so. And I love that about Paul.

In my adventures, I have met many who were convinced of their rightness and righteousness. So much so that they felt no need to even defend their belief. Not only that, but when Scripture was brought up, they were confident to state that such did not apply to them. But here is the Apostle Paul, still checking, still wanting to make sure that his path was the correct path. Humility, a rare quality. I think Paul deeply understood human nature, and that it applied to him just like it did to everyone else. No free pass because he was an Apostle. Fourteen years in, and he still feels the need to check his life and his doctrine. So he goes to get checked. He presents himself to, I can only assume, the leaders in Jerusalem including Peter. It goes well. They deem that even Titus, who is working closely with Paul, need not be circumcised.

That is a servant leader. One who is willing to put himself to the same tests that he would hold others to. Hard to find that today.

Behavior Change (Galatians 1:11-24)

SCRIPTURE

Galatians 1:11-24

COMMENT

Paul claims that the gospel that he was preaching came directly from Jesus himself. But why believe him? I find at least two credible reasons. The first being, what did Paul have to gain in his conversion? Prior to the Damascus Road experience, Paul was on top of the world. A Jewish leader, perhaps in line to become High Priest someday. Educated, a Roman citizen, probably very well off. Conversion meant all of that would be gone, and that he would be shunned by the Jewish leaders as well as any family he had, a castoff, surrendering all possessions as well. (see Philippians 3:4-11)

The second reason is kind of mind blowing. Paul was a murderer of men, women, and children simply because they were Christians. He would now face that same fate from his former peers. I heard one preacher say it would be like seeing the conversion of Osama bin Ladin. Not only would his opponents mistrust him, but he would have to live in constant fear of retribution from his own peers. In fact, read verses 22-24. "And I was still unknown in person to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. They only were hearing it said, “He who used to persecute us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.” And they glorified God because of me."  I have never met Osama, but I know of his deeds. Had he suddenly turned a 180, I think it would be cause for consideration of why.

Paul says in verse 15 that he was set apart before he was born. I don't think God had a plan B. I don't believe that God had someone else waiting in the wings if Paul had refused. You can debate whether or not Paul had a choice in the matter, but Paul was God's man, and he would get the job done. There was no understudy. Called by God's grace, it says that God was pleased to reveal his Son to Paul. Think about that for a moment. A murderous sinner who violently pursued those who loved God, and God was pleased to reveal Jesus to him. It brought God joy. How can you not love a God whose grace is so abundant?

Challies - 5 Worst Christian Best Sellers

Here is the video...



COMMENT
I plan to use a portion of this in a lesson I am preparing. I know that it might take some people by surprise, because I have heard the name Batterson in the class before. In fact, I believe that at one point when I was not there, they used some of his material for teaching.

One thought that has often struck me is this, if 20 to 40 years after Christ's resurrection, Paul had to spend time correcting doctrinal issues, how can we, 2,000 plus years later, think we have it right? But there is an inherent danger in being open minded. That danger is that maybe you were right in the first place, but now are wrong! But I think that is a risk that one must take, because being right by accident is more about being lucky than it is about being right, and if we are going to earnestly search the Scriptures to learn more, that is a risk we must take.

Or not, because I have met some who think they are right because that is the way their church believes, and they refuse to search any farther. Trust can be a dangerous thing.

Are You Sure? (Galatians 1:6-10)

SCRIPTURE

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.

• 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?

Getting Started (Galatians 1:1-5)

SCRIPTURE

Galatians 1:1-5
Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead— and all the brothers who are with me,

To the churches of Galatia: 

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins to deliver us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen.

COMMENT

In writing the book of Galatians, Paul is tackling an issue of false teaching, specifically the idea that in addition to faith in Jesus, some external obedience to the Jewish law was also required (Judaizers). He begins this book by stating where the authority for this book comes from, which is Jesus Christ Himself. Of course, if you are a skeptic, that does not mean much to you as anyone could say their authority comes from Jesus (and many do), but those who knew Paul, who witnessed his ministry, suffering, dedication, etc. probably had little doubt as to his commitment and the truth of his message. Such was the original audience for this book, the church at Galatia.

Paul was an apostle. Not by the normal route, as he was not a disciple of Jesus while Jesus walked the earth. Yet Paul was "set apart from birth" to his role. (Galatians 1:15) So when Jesus was in His earthly ministry, Paul (then called Saul) was probably observing from the outside, despising every word that came from the Savior's mouth. Paul continued this after Jesus's death by persecuting Christians, until an encounter with Jesus Himself, where Jesus struck Saul blind on the road to Damascus, leading to his conversion experience.

In verse 4, Paul describes Jesus as he "who gave himself for our sins to deliver us from the present evil age." I think this is an important statement in light of the teaching that Paul is combating in this book. Paul will confront the Judaizers, those who believed that in addition to Christ's sacrifice on the cross, we must still follow Jewish law to be saved. Paul is setting out that Jesus gave himself for our sins, and it is what He has done, and not what we do in addition to it that saves us. Even today, that is a tough concept for people to grasp.

Interesting Tidbit: There are those who believe that when Jesus encountered the Rich Young Ruler, that was a confrontation with the man then called Saul. Puts an interesting interpretation on the story.

When Confusion Reigns (Matthew 26:47-56)

SCRIPTURE

Matthew 26:47-56

COMMENT

The disciples thought they knew what was going on. They had seemingly resigned themselves to going with Jesus, even if it meant death. All except for Judas, of course. So after falling asleep while Jesus prayed, Jesus comes to wake them, telling them he is about to be betrayed. Enter Judas and a crowd with clubs and swords. Judas approaches Jesus and kisses him, a sign to the others who is the one they are after. They approach and seize Jesus. Here is where it gets awkward.

One of the men with Jesus pulls out a sword and cuts off the ear of the High Priest's servant. The battle is on, and it is a fight to the death. But wait, for Jesus tells him to put the sword away. What!?! Not only that, but according to Luke's version, he even healed the man's ear. How are you going to win a battle when Jesus keeps healing the enemy! How confused they must have been. So when the soldiers lead Jesus away, they flee.

Imagine the agonizing hours and then days of confusion that must have followed. We thought we were supposed to fight and even die with Him if necessary, but He stopped us and went willingly, talking about how this had to happen so that Scripture would be fulfilled.

Ever get confused like that? You think that God has one thing in mind in a situation, but it takes a whole different path. Does that mean that God is not in control? Of course not, it just means that our expectations were not in line with His. But that is hard to accept, because we were so sure of the path things would ultimately take. Reminds me of Garth Brooks song, "Unanswered Prayers."

I think it has a lot to do with expectations and faith. Not the prosperity gospel idea that God did not give us the answer we wanted because we did not have enough faith, but the idea that God is in control and we knows where He wants things to go. I recall a trip I made with my did many years ago. As we got in the car, I asked where we were going. He responded, "You'll find out when we get there." You know what? He was right.