The Galatian Heresy – Part 1

Well, happy Sabbath! It's good to be here and see you all. Last week we were in Petaluma and enjoying being there with everyone. And I traded texts actually with Troy Phelps this morning and he says to say hello to you all. He's in Petaluma meeting there. There for the first time. They're meeting in Wanda Tapia's home up in Santa Rosa. She lives a little north of Santa Rosa. They're still a bit nomadic up there because we haven't got the Petaluma Community Center exactly tied down, so they're going to be meeting in different places. Reese says hello as well.

She's feeling much, much better. I kind of joke with her. She's coming off the drugs now.

So she's taking them all. I won't name them because they have some some reputation. So she is coming off those and she would really, really, really like to come to church next week. So that would be great if she could do that. It kind of comes down to how the evenings go because if she doesn't sleep very well, she tends to sleep in quite a bit because she doesn't sleep during the day. So just in time for my cataract surgery, which we were hoping that she might be up to me not being quite as able to take care of her. So appreciate your prayers for that.

If you know, sort of the last year and a half, I had eye surgery last December and I had eye surgery five years ago and hopefully this will be the last one. So right now you're all a bit blurry because I really can't see out of this eye, so hopefully that'll be better once I get well. So today I'd like to discuss the book of Galatians. This is titled Understanding Galatians Part One. And I've given a number of messages which you might classify as instruction in righteousness or Christian living. Paul instructed Timothy that the word of God was profitable for doctrine, reproof, instruction in righteousness. And we also understand that the word of God is a prophetic responsibility that we have to preach also the prophetic word of God's condemnation really on this world and his plan for all humanity. And I haven't given a, let's say, a more specifically doctrinal message in a little while. This is a little bit of a Bible study, but I don't have really the opportunity to give it to you in a Bible study form, so I'm going to give it in this sermon form. But please write down your questions so we can discuss them in the sermon chat. I'm also going to attempt to speak slowly and to move through this sort of systematically, so hopefully you follow it. And I ask you please stay with me because I've really tried to make this as crisp and understandable as possible. The book of Galatians is sometimes a book that we might read and go, well, I don't quite understand that, but I don't think it means this or I don't think it's saying that. And then we kind of go on to something else. And I'd like to dig into these verses. This is part one that's going to go through about the middle of chapter two, and then in part two we'll get into chapter three and then a little bit in chapter four.

I'd like to begin this message by quoting from a well-known theologian in the United States named Dr. James Boyce. Dr. Boyce, writing an article on the book of Galatians in the Expositor's Bible Commentary, so a very well-known commentary, wrote this. He says, the book of Galatians is the cornerstone of the Protestant Reformation, and few books have done as much to shape the history of the Western world. So you can imagine here these few pages in our Bible has had that kind of impact on the Western world. Few books in history have done as much to shape our culture today in this country and the culture of Europe, and then of course Europe's influence around the globe, and therefore the shape of our modern Western world. And when someone says that, I think we should pay attention, not just from a theological standpoint, not just from an understanding of what God is saying, but from the understanding of the significance of the book and how it is important for us to be aware of what that book says. Martin Luther, the Reformer, called the book of Galatians his mistress. That's how much he loved this book. It was sort of this romantic relationship that he had with the book of Galatians, and he used it to teach against many of the Catholic practices of his day. And since that time, Martin Luther's writings and those who have followed him have used the book of Galatians to discredit the teachings of the Church of God.

Now in the 1990s, which for some of you is ancient history, and for others feels like just yesterday. There is quite this dichotomy, I think, in the room.

But the 1990s were not that long ago. You listen to the music from the 1990s, I'm sure, on the radio. In the 1990s, our former association used the passages from the book of Galatians to discredit the teachings of the worldwide Church of God decades prior. And personally, at that time, I studied into those things, as I hope many of you did who were there at the time. And I studied into these things with a very open mind. I had studied these before, but I had not really gone into the kind of depth that I really wish I had. And of course, there was great controversy at that time. And I came away from that study with a different conclusion than what was being taught by the leaders of the worldwide Church of God at that time. And I came to the conclusion that there were other things going on which were leading them down that path. And I came to a different conclusion. I concluded that actually observing the Sabbath, the Ten Commandments, not eating certain foods and tithing, etc., were actually consistently taught in the New Testament, as they were taught in the Old Testament, and that indeed those same practices would be taught in the Millennium. And we've talked about the Sabbath, for example, in Isaiah 66. It clearly says that people are going to be keeping the Sabbath in the Millennium. And I've described how many mainstream Protestant organizations have a view as to why they don't have to keep it now, but they will keep it in the future. And that's kind of another story. But I came to a different conclusion, and I concluded that the Book of Galatians is indeed supportive of the observance of God's law.

Now, I want to emphasize during this message that a lot of times in the Church of God, we will look at the Book of Galatians for what it doesn't say. That is, we'll look at it with a view of, well, why did Luther say this, and why was Luther wrong? But I think it's also important to look at the Book of Galatians for what it does say, because what it does say is very, very important. And if we can grab on to that and focus on that, I think we'll gain the perspective that we need.

So today, we're going to go look at the first chapter, first and second chapter, of the Book of Galatians. The Book of Galatians is broken into two parts, and this discussion today is really just part one. And part one is typically called Paul's defense of his ministry.

So we're going to look at just this part one as we go through. But I think, as we'll see, there's a lot in part one that has a lot of time skipped over. And when it's skipped over, then the context to some of the more interesting and sort of, let's say, controversial topics in chapter three are missed. So if you would turn with me to Galatians 1, I'd like to start in verse three.

And I'd like to read verses three and five, because verses three and five set the tone for what Paul is attempting to convey to the church in Galatia. It's a very, very important point, which he'll go back to as he continues through this book. Galatians 1 and in verse three, after a traditional reading in verses one and two, Paul writes this, grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil age according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory forever and ever. And this is a fundamental theme of the book. This is, as he described, a present evil age, and we can pretty much trace a straight line from the first century Roman occupation of Judea to our day as the Roman Empire continued for several hundred years, and then different resurrections of that Roman Empire continued.

We, our language that we speak today English is heavily influenced by Greek. It's heavily influenced by Latin, both the prime languages of the Roman Empire at the time, and a lot of the same concepts are there, and a lot of the foundations of the Western world were laid, and we still live in those experiences and traditions today. He says that Christ gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil age according to the will of our God and Father. This is the message of salvation. This is the message that Paul wants to get across. He is right out of the chute saying, this is what's important, not the things that are being taught in Galatians.

And often because we observe the Sabbath and the Holy Days, and we don't eat pork and shellfish, we can feel a certain closeness, let's say, to friends of Christian faith.

Christ delivered us, it says here, and a lot of times what I share with people, and sometimes we don't think about that, but we have actually more in common with our mainstream Christian brothers and sisters, whether they be Protestant or Catholic, because we share this common tenet, more in common than we have with those of the Jewish faith. And because I said, because we observed the Sabbath and the Holy Days, we may sometimes feel a certain affinity for those of the Jewish faith, and that's fine. But the fundamental message of the book of Galatians here in verse 3 and 5 is not the Sabbath or food laws that is going to allow us to be part of God's family. It is the recognition that Christ came and He died for us. And I hope that we can sometimes remember that. Growing up, I always seemed to hang out with the Jewish kids because during the Christmas parties and things, we were the only ones that didn't participate. And so I tended to have a certain affinity for that. But as I got older, I realized, well, actually, I have a great deal in common with my Catholic and Protestant friends because we share this common view.

No other epistle of Paul contains such a thematic statement right within the introduction. A lot of times Paul will start out with thanking them for their faithfulness, thanking them for what they've done, but he goes right into it because he's got something he wants to say. Now in verse 6 and 7, Paul wastes no time going directly to his concern with the congregation in Galatia.

In other letters, as I said, he might say thank you and so forth, but he goes straight in, and it's very direct. He says, I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different gospel, which is not another, but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. So the question is, what is this heresy? That is the question, and I brought a book in. I just left it in my chair, but I'll show it to you later. There's books and books and books written on what is this heresy that is being described. Now if you read most commentaries, they will argue that it was the heresy of Jewish legalism or Judaism. Specifically, that people there were preaching that Gentile converts had to keep the law, just as Jewish converts did, and that the keeping of the law was required for salvation. There's nothing yet that tells us what this heresy is. All we know at this point is that Paul was quite upset about it. Now let's see this passion expressed in verse 8 and 9. But even if we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel to you, then what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you, then what you have received, let him be accursed. And then in verse 10, he makes clear that he's going to ruffle some feathers in the process of writing this book. He says, for do I now persuade men or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a servant of Christ. So before Paul then goes into what this heresy is, he's going to pivot, and he's going to proceed to provide his credentials. Why should anyone listen to Paul? He's going to provide his apostolic credibility, and he's going to name drop. Big time! You've heard about name dropping, right? It's where you're like, I know, so and so. Well, he's going to do a lot of name dropping in the first couple chapters of Galatia to really show why he has the authority to teach what he's teaching. And this is important for us because what this shows is that clearly the church has authority over doctrine. The church has authority over doctrine. Local congregations and local viewpoints can and must be corrected to conform with established teachings of the church. And that's why we have a doctrinal review process, and we've mentioned this before, and I think this is a good point to mention, we have a doctrinal review process in the United Church of God. That if someone disagrees with one of the teachings of the church, that person can write up why they think that there is a difference, why they think that that is not biblically based, and that writing then can be submitted to me as a pastor. I'll review it, and then I forward it up. And it's really not my job to not forward it. My only role is to make sure it sort of conforms to the way that the material needs to be sent. So, for example, if you wrote a hundred pages, I would probably ask you to see if you could condense that a little bit, because it's hard for the doctrinal committee to read a hundred pages.

So we have that doctrinal review process, because we don't want people and local congregations sort of preaching different things. So Paul is telling the Galatians, you don't get to have this separate gospel. You don't need to have to say these things. These things are not correct. And I'm going to tell you as an apostle under and with my authority that you cannot do that.

So let's see how this plays out in verse 11 and 12. But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ. And this is a tremendous claim. This is a tremendous claim that he is making here. And he's going to support it in the following verses. Skip down to verse 15, because this is where he supports that claim. He says, But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb and called me through his grace, to reveal his son to me in me, that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood. That is, he didn't go and sit down and have training sessions with Peter or James, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me. But I went to Arabia and returned again to Damascus. And from verse 18, we understand that he was in Arabia for three years, because it says after three years. So he was in Arabia for three years. And for three years, what he is saying from the flow of verse 12 is that he was taught by Jesus Christ directly, directly in Arabia for three years. What he is sharing here in the book of Galatians was not something he learned from Peter. It's not something he learned from James. It's not something he learned from the other apostles. It's something he learned from Jesus Christ directly through Revelation. You see, Paul described himself as an apostle out of season. He wasn't there among the original 12. And so some people considered him to not have the same apostolic authority. And yet he was an apostle, as was Barnabas. The implication is that Jesus taught him separately for the role that he was going to give. He was going to play with non-Jews. Frankly, most of us. I don't know how many people are of Jewish heritage, but probably most of us are not of Jewish heritage.

So he's going to describe here that he was taught by Jesus himself. So now let's back up to verse 13.

And now that he's sort of described his apostolic authority, he's now going to describe a certain expertise that he has. And this is a very important thing he's telling us about what this heresy could be. Because in verse 13, he says, For you have heard of my former conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it. And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers. Now there's two points in verse 13 that are important. First, Paul names the church of God. We don't attend in another church. We attend the church of God. Paul was persecuted the church of God. Again, there's a straight line from this time to us, both in doctrine and in name.

And in verse 14, Paul gives us a definition of Judaism. And it includes, as it says at the end, zealous for the traditions of the elders. Zealous for the traditions of the elders.

Now the very word Judaism has a very interesting history.

Fundamentally, it means those formerly of the kingdom of Judah. That's where the word Jew comes from, or Judaism. And it's a title associated with ethnicity. But it later became something that was used to describe the religion of the Jewish people. If you study into this, a lot of times you see in history the Jews didn't really have a name to call themselves. We call ourselves Christian. We were called followers of the way. Buddhists are named after the Buddha.

And so forth. But the Jews didn't really have a word to describe their religion until quite late.

And Paul is using a term Judaism here to describe that religion. And what's important to note is that we should not equate the Judaism of the first century that's described in verse 13 and 14 with the religious practices of Moses and the Old Testament. We should not equate those things. They are related. The core of the first century practices do go back to the Torah, the writings and the prophets. But Judaism of the first century included the oral traditions, and many practices which were instituted much later during the Jewish captivity in Babylon, which occurred about 600 years prior to this writing. So King David and Solomon and so forth were the tribe of Judah and Moses gave the law. And Jesus was a Jew, but most importantly, Jesus made it very clear that those who sat in Moses' seat at that time did not understand what Moses taught and had perverted God's true way with their own traditions. So turn with me to Matthew 23, because this is a very important point. A lot of times people will go to the book of Galatians and they'll start pointing to the Old Testament laws. But right at the very beginning of the book, Paul describes Judaism and how he excelled in Judaism. Why is he doing that? Because those kinds of oral traditions and those kinds of practices were being pushed on the Galatians, things that were never intended for God's people to have to do. Matthew 23, the entire book, excuse me, the entire chapter of Matthew 23 is about the perversion of the true teachings of God with the Judaism of that day. Matthew 23 verse 1, then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and Jesus disciples, saying, the scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. Therefore, whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works, for they say and do not. Yeah, they weren't understanding what they were even saying, and they were perverting the truth of God. And this whole chapter is about that. But look at verse 4, for they bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men's shoulders, that they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. So if you have people coming out of this, and they're preaching these things in a church, saying, well, you've got to do this, and you've got to do that, and you're like, well, where is that in the law? Well, it's not. This is the tradition of the elders. This is the understanding of what God really meant by this. I think we've heard this, that you could not carry the weight of, I think, dried figs, right? If it was more than, you know, two dried figs, it was a burden on the Sabbath. I think we've heard these stories that if you were in your house, and there was a fire, you could put your clothes on and walk out. But if you carried your clothes out, right, that would be a burden, and you couldn't do that.

So, I mean, there are all sorts of weird things. We, many of you, I've talked about the Sabbath mode on your oven, right? So you don't have to turn your oven on on the Sabbath. It was automatically come on. So there were a lot of burdens that people were being, that the Pharisees were putting on people at that time. And so when we read Paul in Galatians, I think we can almost hear an echo of Matthew in the background. And there's various debates about when these two books were written.

Most scholars would put the writing of the book of Galatians sort of in the late 40s AD, and the timing of the writing of Matthew is much more controversial. It ranges all the way from 40 AD all the way to 120 AD. Now, we would argue that it was not written in 120 AD because Matthew was not alive, and we firmly believe that Matthew wrote it. So there's an argument to be made that Matthew was written in the 40s, and Galatians was written in the 40s, and so these things would have been circulating around at the same time. And so we need to confront here kind of an awkward fact.

Some in the church who have come from a Jewish heritage may celebrate various cultural traditions, and that's fine. We may feel a certain affinity towards our Jewish friends because they don't eat pork or because we can talk about the Sabbath. But Judaism and its teachings are in opposition to Christian teachings. Judaism is a false gospel, and this I believe is the crux of the book of Galatians. Judaism includes sects that have Gnostic beliefs, mystic beliefs, there's ascetic beliefs, there's all sorts of things mixed in with Judaism both then and today, and a lot of these things were being substituted for the sacrifice of Christ as things that needed to be done in order to be right with God. I'll turn back just a couple pages to Matthew 15 verse 1 and 2.

We see a specific example of Jesus confronting the Pharisees on this point, and again the Pharisaic tradition is the tradition that extends to today. The Sadducees, their traditions died out, the Siyans died out, but the Pharisees continued into the rabbinic and traditions of what we have today. Then the scribes and the Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus saying, why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread. Verse 3, but he answered and said to them, why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? This is Judaism. This is what Paul was steeped in, and he was taught at the feet of Gamaliel. In skipping down to verse 7, Jesus says, hypocrites well that Isaiah prophesied about you, saying, these people will draw near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. In vain they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men. So Paul, writing here in Galatians about his indoctrination into Judaism, almost certainly would have been told by Jesus himself. That is, Jesus himself would have instructed Paul in these things. He would have shared these stories directly with him that Matthew was writing for us about how far the religious authorities of his day had strayed from the truth. And this is what Paul is going to be discussing in the book of Galatians. How far you have strayed from the truth with all of your traditions and your mysticism and your asceticism and so forth. And Paul also certainly was combating these heavy burdens, as I said.

So when the New Testament church understood what Paul preached was the gospel of the kingdom of God and the fact that Christ was the Messiah and he came preaching, that's what the New Testament church understood. But that's not what Galatia was doing. This is not about an interpretation of a Sabbath day's journey or how to tithe and so forth. That's not what we believe and that's not what they should have believed. These things don't allow us to be right with God.

So there are hints of legalism here, but legalism is in the sense of sort of this esoteric Jewish interpretation of the law. Let's go back to Galatians. And as I said, this is a very strong indication of what this controversy was about because he's describing how steeped he was in Judaism. So he is an expert in what's going on there. Otherwise, he wouldn't need to mention it. He could have gone from verse 11 down to verse 17 and skipped that whole discussion, but he put it in there for a reason. Now look in verse 18.

Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter and remained with him 15 days, but I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord's brother. Now concerning these things which I write to you, indeed before God I do not lie. Paul is connecting himself firmly with the headquarters church in Jerusalem.

This is an important section as it confirms that Paul was 100% in agreement with Peter and James. 100% agreement. And then in verse 21 and 24, we see that after three years of being taught, as I said by Jesus Christ himself, and 15 days being basically interviewed. You can almost imagine a sort of an interrogation by Peter and James. He went out and he preached the truth, the same truth that was described in verse 4. And then in chapter 2, 1 and 2, we see again how Paul made sure that his preaching was in alignment with the teaching and the authority of the headquarters congregation.

Do you see how he's building the case here? He's not some rogue apostle. He's not some rogue person preaching his own thing. He's 100% aligned with the teaching of the church. And so in chapter 2, he says, then after 14 years, I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas and also took Titus with me and I went up by revelation and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run or had run in vain. So in chapter 2, Paul makes clear that he wanted to talk with the leaders of the church to make sure that he wasn't doing anything that would be useless or unprofitable.

That's what he means by being in vain. Again, he is just telling how much he is in sync in this message so that nobody could come back and say, well, yes, but in Jerusalem, they're saying we need to be circumcised. In Jerusalem, they're saying that we have to be keeping these things to be right with God. And in verse 3, we see another clear indication of the problem in Galatia because he says, yet not even Titus, who was with me being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.

Paul goes out of his way to show that even though Titus was in Jerusalem, with all of the church leaders, he was not compelled to follow this Old Testament law, this very clear law regarding circumcision. And the reason he says is almost certainly because leaders in Galatia were compelling Gentile converts to be circumcised as a condition of being in the church. So this is an earthquake. If I walked into church here and I read you an Old Testament law from Exodus and I said, you don't have to observe that anymore, you would run me out here on a rail.

You would be riding Cincinnati and saying, Mr. Petworth is preaching heresy. But that's what was going on here because the people who felt that being circumcised was necessary were going back to the Old Testament and saying, but Moses himself said this. And Paul was saying, no, you don't need to be circumcised. This is what is so, for me, just the strongest argument here of what they're talking about.

You don't need to talk about tithing or clean and unclean needs or Sabbath observance or holy observance. You just talk about circumcision. That's enough to split the church right there. That's enough to split the church right there. And that's why we have Acts 15 and the Jerusalem Conference where Paul himself, who received this revelation directly from Jesus Christ, submitted himself to church authority and came up to Jerusalem to have this whole conference on Acts 15 where they concluded that it's the circumcision of the heart that we keep today, not of the flesh, and that all people have circumcised the heart.

So he's going out of his way to describe the fact that this doesn't need to be done. Titus wasn't compelled to be circumcised, as I said, and the Jerusalem Conference made that clear. So look at verse 4 and see how Paul expounds on this point. It's not just a side point. It's a critical point he's making. But this occurred, this issue here, of the circumcision because brethren secretly brought in who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty, which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us unto bondage, to whom we did not yield submission, even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.

But from those who seemed to be something, whatever they were, it makes no difference to me. God shows personal favoritism to no man, for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me.

So Paul makes it very clear that this teaching about needing to be baptized, these heavy burdens of Judaism, these were not things that needed to be laid on people. Now, mainstream Christianity will argue that any reference to circumcision in the book of Galatians is a reference to all aspects of the wall. They call it a gateway. You've heard that before, right? It's a gateway. Marijuana is a gateway drug. Once you do that, you're into all the drugs.

Well, in this case, it's not a gateway. It's describing circumcision. And if it's a gateway, if it's a gateway at all, it's a gateway into oral traditions and legalism and heavy burdens of the Pharisees. So when it talks about circumcision, that's what it's talking about. And we see in verse 7 to 10 that the leaders in Jerusalem were 100% in agreement with this. There's no dispute among the leadership of the church. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel, that is, we're now talking about Peter and James and so forth. For the uncircumcised had been committed to me as the gospel for the circumcised, that is, to the Jew and to the Gentile he's describing, was to Peter. For he who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me towards the Gentiles. And when James, Cephas, and John seem to be pillars, who seem to be pillars, perceive the grace that had been given to me. They gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. That is, you go out here to the people, to the Gentiles, we'll go to those of Jewish heritage. Now Reza Aslan, who is a well-known scholar of Christianity, in his book, Zealot, the Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth, a bestseller, millions of copies printed, he argues that division between the traditional Jewish-based Christianity that began originally with Jesus and the apostles, and the larger non-Jewish preaching of Paul, was so great by this time that by the 60s AD, these two groups were two separate religions. He argues this, and many in Christianity today will argue that, yes, they diverged, and they'll look at us and say, well, yeah, you're not really Christian. You're part of that old Jewish-Christian thing. We know we move beyond that from the book of Galatians. I have really heard that. I've heard people say that to me directly. We move beyond that. The book of Galatians makes that clear. But let's be clear about what we just read in verses 7 to 10 here. There was no disagreement, and he's name-dropping. He says, James. Now, there's a point of authenticity here that I want to point out to you. He referred to James in verse 19 as James, the Lord's brother, and then in verse 9, chapter 2, verse 9, he just calls him James. There's a 14-year difference between these accounts.

14 years earlier, he had to call him James' Lord's brother because there was the apostle James.

But 14 years later, the apostle James had been beheaded, and there was only one James, and so he didn't have to clarify what James he was talking about. He was talking about James, the Lord's brother, James, the head of the Jerusalem church, a very well-known historical figure written about by Josephus. He uses this name for Peter and John, the apostle that Jesus loved. These are the big three at that time, and he says that they were in agreement. Gave him the right hand of felt. He described exactly what he was preaching, and they were in agreement. So there's no controversy here about this point, and he's going to tell the Galatians, what you're doing is diametrically opposed to what's being preached in Jerusalem, what's being preached by James, by Peter, and by John, and by me. We're all on the same page, and what you're doing by requiring circumcision, by laying the heavy burdens of Judaism on people, is wrong.

And as I said, the issue is circumcision. Now, I described how you would run me out on a rail if I came in and started preaching something that was contrary to what was written. But let me give you this example here. Go to Exodus 12, verse 48. And I want you to imagine that you are a Jew of the first century. Maybe you might even remember Jesus preaching, and you're listening in synagogue, and you're listening in people's homes, and you come across Exodus 12, verse 48. And it says, when a stranger sojourns with you—ah, those are the Gentiles, those are the strangers, the sojourn with you—and wants to keep the Passover of the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it, and he shall be as a native of the land. For no uncircumcised person shall eat it. You imagine? This is God's law, and now you're allowing these Gentiles uncircumcised to keep the Passover? No, this is not my church, and out they go. This is very, very, very controversial at that time. You don't need to go into Sabbath-keeping and all these other types of things. This is what's said.

Go over to Numbers 9, verse 14. A lot of times we think that Gentiles couldn't associate with Jews. We're going to get to that in a moment. But in actual fact, God's law had a very clear path for this. Numbers 9, verse 14. It says, if a stranger sojourns among you and would keep the Lord's Passover, he must do so according to the right of Passover and according to its ceremony. You shall have one ordinance both for the stranger and the native of the land. So Gentiles were allowed to keep the Passover so long as they were circumcised. And this change would have been enough to cause a great deal of division within the church. Go to Acts 11, verse 1. We can see this.

I hope you're getting the sense here that the controversy in Galatia clearly involved circumcision and clearly involved Judaism and these oral traditions, as Paul says in Galatians, the traditions of our fathers. Acts 11, verse 1. Now, when the apostles and brethren who were in Judah heard that the Gentiles had also received the Word of God, and when Peter came up to Jerusalem, those of the circumcision contended with him. They quoted Exodus 12.48. They were quoting that, saying, You went into uncircumcised men and ate with them. But Peter explained it to them in order from the beginning, saying, I was in the city of Joppa. And he recounts this story of Cornelius. Just go back to verse 28. Just turn back one page. This is what he says to Cornelius. Then he said, Peter, you know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation, but God has shown me that I should not call any man unclean or common. So, Peter was clearly understanding this. He was on the same page and so forth. So, let's go back to Galatians 2. And this time, let's continue in verse 11. Because this is where some people might say, okay, yeah, I'm with you so far. And if you're listening to this and you're new to the Church of God, or you don't believe some of these things, maybe you're still with me so far.

Let's go now to verse 11, because this is where people are going to say, yes, yes, yet, but look at verse 11. Look at verse 11. Galatians 2 verse 11. But when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face because he was to be blamed. So, he's described how they were all in agreement, and then Peter pulled a fast one. For before certain men came from James, this would be of the sort of this faction that believed that the circumcision was still required, he would eat with the Gentiles, but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. This is that controversy that was there. And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him. So, even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, if you writing a, if you being a Jew live in the manner of Gentiles and not as a Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews? He confronted him right there. But again, what's the controversy? It's the circumcision faction coming down, saying there's all these things, these oral traditions, and in Exodus 12 and so forth. We've got it from the beginning of relations all the way here, it's a straight line in terms of Judaism and circumcision, and all of these oral traditions and so forth. And he confronted, he confronted Peter right here. There were certain customs and ritual laws relating to associating with non-Israelite nations. And this was, as I said, the verbal law. This was the tradition of the elders. And based on what Paul shared earlier, Peter agreed. But now Peter was allowing certain peer pressure to influence him. And that, you guys have never done that, right? You've never behaved one way one time and another way. You've never, yeah, I mean, we do this. This is our human nature, isn't it? Yeah, we know we're supposed to act this way, but then people come around and maybe we feel a little intimidated by them, or we want to fit in, and then we kind of compromise here and there. And this is what happened. And Peter's calling him out. That's why he said in verse 10 of chapter one, I'm going to ruffle some feathers. He called Peter out on it. And we know that Peter was in agreement because we read Peter's own words in Acts 10.

We don't need to take the time to turn there, but you can write John 4 verse 9 in your notes, how Jesus himself talked with a Samaritan woman. If Peter couldn't eat with Jews, then what was Jesus doing sitting next to a Samaritan woman? That would be scandalous. Jesus didn't separate himself. He wasn't breaking any law. So Peter, James, and John were struggling with factions within the church who felt that many aspects of the law had to be kept, including circumcision, and they had a hard time letting go. And when I say many aspects, I mean the oral traditions and things have been added. So let's finish the sermon by looking at Galatians 2 verse 15 and 16. We're going to finish up here, which is a scripture which is often quoted arguing against many of the things that we do in the church of God. Galatians 2 verse 15. And if I could go ahead, have Mr. Willis and Mr. Malecia. I've got a handout for you here on this one. I said it was going to be a little bit more technical. Let's see. I think I kept one. Yeah, okay. And Mr. Malecia, can I have one of those that you're starting to use? I'm going to give you a handout. It's an inter-lineary of Galatians 2 verse 16, so you can follow along in the Greek as we go through this, because this is one of these verses that's often inappropriately used. As they're handing it out, I'm going to read it. So Paul is going to make this argument. We who are Jews by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles, comma, knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ.

Even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, for by the works of the law, no flesh shall be justified. There it is! Don't need to keep the Sabbath. There it is! Don't need to tithe. That's what people will go to with verse 16. So let's understand what's actually written in here. I think some of you have this.

So I'm going to make reference to Galatians 2 verse 16 on this sheet. And on this sheet, on the top line, you have the Strong's number for Galatians 2.16. The second line, you have the Greek sort of in the Latinized version, so you can kind of guess at its pronunciation. The third line is the actual Greek. That's where, you know, it's Greek to me. So that looks a little different than what we're used to. The fourth line is the English translation of that. And then the line right below is the part of speech. So let's, if you have Galatians 2.16 on my little handout, let's read this verse as it were in the Greek order. I'm not going to actually read it in Greek, but I'm going to read it in the Greek original order according to the majority text. This is the majority text. There's Alexandrian texts, and there's different texts. This is the majority text for the Greek. It says, verse 16, knowing... everybody with me? You know what I'm reading? No? You don't have any yet? Oh, okay, we've got a whole room over here missing Mr. Willis. Galatians 2, or right over here.

Can we run out?

Oh, there's a mix-up. That's okay.

There we go. We'll give it a moment. I want you to follow this, because this gets a little technical.

All right, Galatians 2, verse 16.

We're close. Yes.

Yeah, there's two that are coming. Yeah, I'm going to turn on the one that's on Galatians 2. 16. All right, Galatians 2. 16. Let's read it together in the original Greek order. The first thing I want to point out to you about Galatians 2. 16 is what I've put in a little box. See, works of law. So there's a little box here that says works of law. And that phrase works of law is repeated several times in here. Now, if you compare what I read in my New King James with what is in the Greek, you'll see that the Greek says works of law. It doesn't say the works of the law. In my New King James, it says the works of the law. It says man is not justified by the works of the law. And that would kind of imply to somebody that he's talking about the Old Testament, because the works of the law feels kind of specific, doesn't it? But the Greek doesn't say the works of the law. It just says works of law.

So if you look at Romans 2.15, so I gave you Romans 2.15. I just wanted to contrast that, because in Romans 2.15, the Greek is the works of the law. So Paul could have written the works of the law. So if you look on Romans 2.15, I've got a little box, and let's read that. Who show the work of the law, written in the hearts of them bearing witness, their conscience, and being one another, the thoughts accusing, are also defending. Paul's referring here to the law of God, the work of the law. And there's an article before each one. But in Galatians, he didn't decide to write it that way. He decided to write works of law. And in fact, he didn't write it once, he didn't write it twice, he wrote it three times, just to be very clear.

So Paul is referring to any work of any law. He's describing the most generic, broadest concept that he can describe right here. Any works of any law, no definite article. If Paul had wanted to be clear that he was referring to the works of the law, he could have said what he said in Romans 2 verse 15. So we should be clear that nowhere in the book of Galatians does Paul use the definite article. That is to say, Paul is referring to any works of any law, whether it is traditions of Judaism, practices of the Pharisees, Gnosticism, mysticism, or even certain practices of the law of God. Because really the issue here was that you had this melange of all sorts of things that the Galatians were doing — oral traditions of Judaism, circumcision of the Old Testament that was no longer required, asceticism, mysticism. We're going to see this in Galatians 4. There were all sorts of things going on. It was a real hodgepodge of things that were being taught in Galatia that were required for salvation. And Paul is saying, no, those things aren't going to do it. Don't start talking about hand washing or circumcision or abstaining from certain foods on certain days and all sorts of things. That's not what does it. I'm going to read you the complete Jewish Study Bible translation. I think they get pretty close on this.

The complete Jewish Study Bible says this, Even so, we have come to realize that a person is not declared righteous by God on the ground of his legalistic observance of Torah commands. I would disagree with their determination that it's Torah commands, but I do think their legalistic observances is right.

But through Messiah Yeshua's trusting faithfulness. So when properly translated, this passage sets forth a remarkable truth about what is being described. And that is that it is not our works that make us right with God. It is Christ's sacrifice that makes us right with God. We cannot of our own willpower and strength justify ourselves before God and therefore be in his kingdom. It is only through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ that we can do that. And I think we understand in God's church that once we understand that and we are covered by Christ's blood, then we live a life worthy of God's calling. And that living life worthy of God's calling involves observing God's laws—not Judaism, not traditions of elders, not physical circumcision—but understanding what God would have us do. And this point, I think, is brought out very interestingly by the Greeks. If you go back to my little handout on Galatians 2.16, I've circled another box on here, which I think is one of the most powerful points in the book of Galatians. After works of law, you'll see another box, and it says—I've got a little asterisk there—it says, if not through.

Now, a lot of translations will just skip over all those three words and translate that as accept.

Or, but. But it doesn't say accept or but. It says, if not through. It's three Greek words, quite precise. And that last word through is the word dia. I've circled it, you'll see. And that word dia means by means of. By means of. So if we think about what Paul is saying, he's saying that men are not justified by works of law. And those works of law can include some of the teachings of the Old Testament, because those were all mixed in in Galatia. It was hard to kind of pull those apart. If not through. If not through. That is, accept through, or by means of.

See, this denotes a channel. It denotes a connection. There is a connection here.

There is a connection, this if not but through. This verse properly translated clearly asserts that dutiful observance of the laws of God is not counterproductive or contrary to faith. This is not contrary to faith. Quite the opposite. It says that man is not declared righteous by works of law if but through, or that is by means of faith in Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ provides the means by which we can be justified. But the works of law are still there, if not but through, by means of. It is not works of law but by Jesus Christ, through his help as we understand that law. And what do we understand? We ask for God. Help me to understand your commandments. Help me to keep your commandments that they are not grievous. Help me to understand your nature and character by your law. We have tons of writings about God's law. It is through Christ that we understand how to observe his law. It is not our lawkeeping that justifies us. It is only Christ's sacrifice that allows us to be right with God. But there's a connection through these these things. And I think what we see here is a complement to James 1, excuse me, James 2, verse 14. I'd like you to turn to James 2, verse 14, because one of the things that Martin Luther detested was the book of James. He called Galatians his mistress and the book of James an epistle of straw because the book of James talked about works. And the book of James talks about how works and faith go together. And this is one of the great sort of comparisons that we can make in Scripture. James 2, verse 14. What does it profit my brethren if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Wow! What happened? See, this, Martin Luther did not want to put James in the Bible because that would seem to contradict what he how he interpreted Galatians. But if we understand, if not through, if we understand that Paul was saying it is Jesus Christ that helps us understand these things. Yes, we are justified alone by Jesus Christ, but he helps us understand the law. Just like James says, what does it profit? Can faith save him if a brother or sister is naked in destitute of daily food? And one of you says to them, depart in peace, be warmed and filled, but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body? What does it profit?

Thus, also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, you have faith and I have works. Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. If not but through. This is such an interesting passage. I find it so powerful to see this connection of what Paul is describing here. Don't be confused, he says to the Galatians. It's not all your works of law that are going to justify you.

If not but through Jesus Christ helping you understand these things. Not your legal lipstick observances, not requiring circumcision of the fleshman, circumcision of the heart that matters. This is what Paul is getting across. This is what Paul is describing to the Galatians.

So that concludes part one of the sermon. And in part two, we'll dig into the verses which also overturn or are supposed to overturn the observance of the Sabbath and Old Testament laws. But I hope this is helpful. I hope, by the way, this is from BibleHub.com. I find it really useful if you really want to dig into the interlinearity and see some of these things. I've just printed off this for you. And I hope that's helpful. And I hope that if you have questions, you please raise them in the sermon chat so we can discuss them. I tried to go through here slowly and hopefully in a way that's understandable. You know, the Church of God understands that there is not a disconnect between what Peter preached and what Paul preached. There's not a disconnect between observance of God's law and faith in Jesus Christ. They go hand in hand. And we understand that it is Jesus Christ that justifies us, that makes us right with God, and that we then, because of our love for God and for what he's done for us, we then have an opportunity to love God and keep his commandments. I hope this is helpful.