GALATIANS CHAPTER 2
(A Bible Study Commentary compiled by Don Krow)
There are 2 things in this section of scripture (Gal. 2:1-10) that would verify the validity of Paul's message of salvation by grace. (1) Titus who was a Greek was not compelled to be circumcised (Gal. 2:3), proving that salvation was through faith without the works of the law (Gal. 2:16). (2) Paul's gospel of grace was approved by the leaders of the mother church, the church of Jerusalem (Gal. 2:6-9).
GAL 2:1 Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also.
The book of Acts records 5 visits that Paul made to Jerusalem: "(1) The visit after Paul left Damascus (Acts 9:26-30; Gal. 1:18-20). (2) The famine visit (Acts 11:27-30). (3) The visit to attend the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:1-30). (4) The visit at the end of the second missionary journey (Acts 18:22). (5) The final visit which resulted in Paul's imprisonment and trial (Acts 21:15 - 23:35)." (TBKC, p. 593).
This second visit to Jerusalem, 14 years after Paul's first one is thought to be the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27-30, the Council of Jerusalem visit of Acts 15:1-29, or possibly neither one {for Paul was directed to go up by revelation at this time - Gal. 2:2}. There is a diversity of opinion about this.
"If this second visit is indeed the Council of Jerusalem visit, it appears that "after Paul's arrival in Jerusalem there was first a private conference with the leaders of the church (Gal. 2:1-9) and then the conference representing the entire church which Luke describes" (Acts 15:1-29) (TETG, p. 47).
Paul's companions on this visit was Barnabas, a Jewish brother that helped evangelize and establish the Galatian churches on Paul's first missionary journey (Acts 13-14). And Titus a Gentile convert to Christ, but not submitted to the Jewish rites of circumcision.
GAL 2:2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.
It has now been 14 years since Paul has been to Jerusalem. Much preaching work has been done by Paul among the Gentiles. The reason Paul states for this visit is a "revelation." It has been revealed by God to Paul that it is time to communicate, to lay out, {Gk. to set forth in words} the gospel that he has been preaching to the Jerusalem church. If Jerusalem is preaching a different gospel, Paul's work could be stopped and his work would be in vain. He laid the gospel out first "unto them" the Jerusalem church, and then privately {in a deeper and more systematic way} to them which were of reputation i.e. men of recognized position, the church leaders. Three such leaders were mentioned (Gal. 2:9) James the Lord's brother and overseer of the Jerusalem church, John the apostle and son of Zebedee, an the apostle Peter who had already been called before the Jerusalem church for his work among the Gentiles (See Acts 11:1-18).
So the big 4 are together, Peter, James, John and Paul to discuss the problems of the gospel and the law among the Jews and Gentiles.
The Judaizers are assuming that the leaders of the church will take their side against Paul and his gospel (See Acts 15:1-2).
GAL 2:3 But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised:
Paul had brought Titus on this trip as a test case of a full-fledged converted Gentile to faith in Jesus Christ. If Titus is forced to be circumcised the truth of the gospel will be compromised.
Titus was received by the apostles and the truth remained that man is justified by faith in Jesus Christ and not by the works of the law (Gal. 2:16).
GAL 2:4 And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:
This matter of justification by law plus faith in Christ, arose because false brethren had infiltrated the church spying on spiritual liberty in Christ and wishing to bring believers into religious bondage (Acts 15:1-2). These legalists had already infiltrated within the ranks of true Christianity as described in similar scriptures such as Jude 1:3-4 {a perversion of grace} and 1 Tim. 1:7 {a perversion of law}.
Paul speaks of these religious people who wanted to mix faith in Christ and Jewish circumcision for justification as "false brethren." Paul is later going to state, "If you are counting on circumcision and keeping the Jewish laws to make you right with God, then Christ cannot save you" (Gal. 5:2 LB).
This shows us that while claiming to be Christians and yet embracing a false gospel, will bring one into a state of false Christianity.
GAL 2:5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
The real question of Galatians 2:5 is "Will the truth of the gospel remain?" It is clear from this little epistle that a person may begin with a true dependence upon Christ and him crucified for total acceptance before God and then return to the law mentality of self-effort for acceptance. As Paul says, "Will the truth of the gospel continue with you?"
Paul would not submit himself for a moment to the mixture of law and grace lest the gospel of Christ be perverted.
GAL 2:6 But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me:
The perversion of the original gospel was not that something was taken away from it but rather that something was added to it. When Paul presented his gospel to the apostles they added nothing to it. In other words it was complete as preached by Paul. Nothing more was added to it or taken from it.
GAL 2:7-9 [7] But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; [8] (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) [9] And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
There were not 2 different gospels preached by Peter and Paul, a gospel of the circumcision and a gospel of the uncircumscision. For there is only one true gospel as stated by Paul earlier in Gal.1:6-7.
The phrase "for he that wrought effectually" carries the idea that God was using Peter in a mighty way among the Jews and God was using Paul in a mighty way among the Gentiles.
The term "the right hands of fellowship" implies a united missionary effort and partnership to work together for the spreading of the gospel among Jews and Gentiles. Especially Peter with Jews and Paul with the Gentiles.
The "grace" that was given to Paul and perceived by the pillars of the church: James, Cephas and John was the effective working of God's power that was demonstrated through the ministry of Paul to the Gentiles. Paul spoke many times about God's ability working through him and not any ability of his own (See Eph. 3:1-3, 7; 1 Cor. 15:9-10).
GAL 2:10 Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.
This agreement that Paul and Barnabas should continue work among the Gentiles, while Peter, James and John were to concentrate upon Jews ended with a final request and agreement that Paul should remember the poor. In the Greek, the tense and the verb carries the idea "that we should keep on remembering the poor" (Wuest's Word Studies, p. 68). The Today's English Version implies that the "poor" being spoken of here were the needy saints of Jerusalem and Judea. "All they asked was that we should remember the needy in their group, which is the very thing I have been eager to do." Paul had already done this on a previous occasion (See Acts 11:27-30) and will continue to do so in his future missionary journeys (See 1 Cor. 16:1-3; Rom. 15:26-27).
GAL 2:11-12 [11] But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. [12] For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
A certain aspect of the gospel had been revealed to Peter by Divine revelation from the Lord just as the gospel was revealed to Paul. This aspect of revelation dealt with Peter's vision about dietary laws of Lev. 11, Dt. 14 and it's relation to the Gentiles acceptance into the body of Christ.
Even though it was unlawful for a Jew to associate with or visit a Gentile (Acts 10:28) the Lord Jesus through a vision concerning dietary laws showed Peter the cleansing of foods and the acceptance of all men through the gospel (See Acts 10:28; 34-48).
Now Peter is visiting the church at Antioch, a predominantly Gentile church, but it did contain some Jews (Gal. 2:13). As Peter was enjoying his acceptance with God through the Lord Jesus Christ, he was free to enjoy his Christian liberty. He ate with the Gentiles, partook in their Christian love-feasts and possibly ate foods that were considered unclean by the Mosaic law. At just that time some Jewish brethren from Jerusalem arrived at Antioch. Because of religious fear of some legalists seeing him break tradition, he withdrew from eating with the Gentiles and became a hypocrite. Because this action was more than just Christian liberty, in fact an action that projected that Jew and Gentile were not One New Man through faith in Christ Jesus. Paul opposed and rebuked Peter publicly in front of the whole church.
GAL 2:13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
The pressure was on: Obviously these Jewish believers from James felt that the law which divided the Jews from the Gentiles was still in effect. Peter's action, not his belief was an influence that also caused the other Jewish believer's in Antioch to also follow Peter's hypocrisy. Although Peter and the others certainly knew better, their actions compromised the gospel and in effect reconstructed the middle wall of partition (Eph. 2:14-15). Even Barnabas the great companion of Paul and minister to the Gentiles was led astray by Peter's example. Although Barnabas came from Cyprus (a Gentile center) he was also associated with the Jerusalem church and was their delegate to Antioch (Acts 4:36-37; 9:26-30; 11:22-26). This also could have been such a great pressure that he felt he had to pacify and please these Jerusalem brethren.
GAL 2:14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
When Paul saw that Peter and the rest of the Jews conduct did not follow the true path of the gospel, he said to Peter before the whole Christian congregation at Antioch, "If you, though a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, you have no right to make the Gentiles copy Jewish ways" (JB).
"By drawing back Peter was actually forcing the Gentile Christians to find ways to be acceptable to the Jewish Christians, and that way could very well be by following the Jewish law, which in effect would make them live like Jews" (UBS Handbook, p.43). Peter by his conduct was denying the truth that the gospel proclaims, "In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature" (Gal.6:15).
GAL 2:15-16 [15] We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, [16] Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Paul is now stating to Peter, "We who are Jews by birth and not "Gentile sinners," know that a man is not declared righteous by the works of the law but by faith in Christ" (TEV; KJV).
Paul is using a term used by Pharisaic Jews that describes all people outside the covenant of the law as being "Gentile sinners." Paul goes on to say that "no man is declared righteous by the works of the law but by the faith of (in) Jesus Christ." Although the law of Moses is being spoken of here, this can also be understood as any religious law {what day you worship, the length of hair, dress, the mode of baptism, or other religious codes}, for by those works no person can be justified.
GAL 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
The term "works of the law" is used 7 times in the New Testament in 5 scriptures (Rom. 9:32; Gal. 2:16; 3:2, 5, 10).
What are "works of law?" Any rule, command or law that a person observes in an attempt to meet God's standard of righteousness for acceptance and right standing before God. In other words, a righteousness produced by one's self, a righteousness belonging to one's self, offered to God as a means of meeting God's standard for acceptance. Phil. 3:9 says it's "having MINE OWN RIGHTEOUSNESS {a righteousness belonging to me} which is of the law." (Read Romans 9:30 - Romans 10:10 for a fuller understanding of "the works of the law.")
"Works of the law" have always been man's, as well as the world's religious systems attempt to be accepted by God. Paul says, Let me "be found in Him (Christ) not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ -- the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith" (Phil. 3:9 NIV).
It takes a radical revelation of the gospel of grace to abandon faith in the works of the law. For men have not realized that God's standard of righteous is the RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD alone.
This is the first time the term "justified" is used in this epistle.
Charles Swindoll in his book "The Grace Awakening" states, "Justification is the sovereign act of God whereby He declares righteous the believing sinner - while he is still in a sinning state." (p. 24)
Donald Barnhouse stated, "God...credit's...this man Abraham to be perfect even at a moment when Abraham was ungodly in himself. That is justification" (Rom. vol. 3, p. 208). (See Rom. 4:5)
"(1) To "justify" means "to declare righteous," not to make righteous." It is the opposite of condemnation (See Rom. 8:33-34).
(2) It is a word used in reference to trial and judgment - a word that belongs to the law court (Dt. 25:1). It is in every sense a verdict of the judge. It means to be declared righteous by divine sentence, acquitted in the judgment of God, judged righteous at God's tribunal" (Justification, Robert Brinsmead, p. 58).
(3) "Being a legal word, it is related to the law. To "justify" means "setting one right before law" (Systematic Theology, Augustus Strong, p. 856).
"Sanctification, i.e. faith working by love "is the fruit of justification. The Christian life and experience are not the gospel but the fruit of the gospel" (Justification, R. Brinsmead, p. 64).
GAL 2:17-18 [17] But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. [18] For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.
Verse 17 is a very difficult scripture to interpret, but it seems to be that Paul is saying, If I am seeking justification in Christ alone, then it requires that I abandon self-righteousness {faith in keeping the law as a means of attaining righteousness}. If it is wrong that Christ alone can save, and I'm found to be a sinner then Christ is the one that promoted or furthered that sin {because I abandoned the law so that I could trust him alone}.
Rather, says Paul than that being the case, If I build up the old system of obeying the law {works - righteousness} to be saved, in reality I've only made myself a transgressor, i.e. a lawbreaker. For the law is a complete system that must be obeyed in it's entirety (Jas. 2:10-11) or it brings one under a curse (Gal. 3:10). It never brought one into salvation, for it's power is in the strength of the flesh {to keep all the do's and resist all the don'ts}. It was destined to failure as a means of salvation because (1) It was a complete unit that must not be broken in any area. (2) It would fail because of the weakness of our sinful flesh (See Rom. 8:3).
GAL 2:19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
It was through the law that I was released from the law. The law said, Live perfectly or you must die. "The soul that sinneth it shall die" (Ezek. 18:4, 20). I sinned, and I died. But when did I die? I was crucified with Christ (v. 20), when He died I died. He died to satisfy a broken law. After dead their is no more that the law could do to me. By death I've been released from any more control or domination of the law. The just demands of the law have been met, satisfied, and released from me by the death of Jesus Christ. Now I'm free to live in a total relationship with God. This relationship is totally by grace through faith (See Rom. 7:4, 6).
GAL 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
Verse 20 is connected to verse 19 by declaring the believer's death to the law by being crucified with Christ. Paul is saying "that under the old system of the law, the "I" was prominent, it was the "I" that lived. To depend on the law is to put emphasis on ONE'S OWN POWERS to do what it requires" (UBS Handbook, p. 50).
Paul is stating that the way that I live now is through dependence upon Christ who loved me and gave himself for me. This faith is built on the fact of Christ's personal love for us. (For more understanding, see THE EXCHANGED LIFE booklet at this website).
GAL 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
The word "frustrate" suggests defeating in the sense of nullifying another's accomplishment or making it ineffective (AH Dict.). If righteousness, i.e. salvation, could come through obedience to law, then Christ's accomplishments on the cross have been nullified, defeated and made ineffective.
Paul is stating, {this is how the Greek word is used} "I'm not despising, rejecting, bringing to nothing, frustrating, disannuling or casting off God's grace by seeking justification through the law."
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(Sources cited and consulted)
(AH Dict.) The American Heritage Dictionary, Published by Houghton Mifflin Company, William Morris, Editor.
Justification, by Robert D. Brinsmead, Verdict Publications, Fallbrook, California 92028.
The Exchanged Life (booklet) by Don W. Krow. AWM, P. O. BOX 3333, Colorado Springs, CO 80934.
Romans, Vol.3, by Donald Barnhouse. The Grace Awakening, by Charles R. Swindoll. Word Publishing, Dallas. London. Vancouver. Melbourne.
(TBKC or BKC) The Bible Knowledge Commentary. Editors: John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck. Victor Books, Wheaton, IL 60187.
(UBS Handbook) A Handbook on Paul's Letter to the Galatians, By Daniel C. Arichea and Eugne A. Nida. United Bible Societies, New York.
(WWS or Wuest) Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament. Vol.1, By Kenneth S. Wuest. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49502.
(KJV) King James Version or Authorized Version of 1611.
(LB) The Living Bible. A paraphrase by Kenneth N.Taylor. Tyndale House Publishers.
(NIV) The New International Version. By the International Bible Society, Colorado Springs, CO.
(TEV) Today's English Version. By the American Bible Society, New York.
(J. B. Phil) The New Testament in Modern English. By J. B. Phillips. Macmillan Publishing Co.,Inc., New York.
E-mail us at: WJoKrow@aol.com
| commentary index | next chapter |
†