Galatians 2:4-10 Bible Teaching

Welcome
Prayer
Song
Silence

Okay, Paul is going to continue to give some background info on the situation at hand relative to him and His apostleship.

Afterward, at verse 16 he will begin to bring the goods home relative to the topic at hand – and those scriptural good will continue, for the most part, until the end of the short epistle.

So, last week he left off saying

Galatians 2.4-15
March 10th 2019
Milk
Galatians 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:

I would add that some group of Judaisers came to the Church at Galatia and in all probability, using the names of the other Apostles, were preaching that the Law of Moses must be kept.

Let’s read through verses 5-14:

5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you
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:
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.
10 Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.
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.
13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
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?

Okay back to verse 5:

Speaking of those who secretly came in to spy out their liberty, Paul adds at verse 5

5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.

We did not submit to this at all. We did not yield to their false gospel even for the shortest tune.

Instead we steadily opposed their claims, in order that the matter might be forever settled.

What matter? That the laws of Moses were not to be imposed upon the Gentile converts as obligatory to salvation or Christian living.

It seems like a pretty straightforward statement. The reason Paul resisted them who were pushing for them to embrace the Law of Moses completely was so that:

“the truth of the gospel might continue with you.”

It is an interesting line because the very presence of it clearly suggests that the truth of the Good News CAN depart from people who once embraced it.

This thought is generally dismissed by a segment of believers today who suggest that once a person has received the truth they can never leave or it or be beguiled away from its light.

Not so.

The passages that speak to God calling and never letting those called go typically are directed at Jesus eleven apostles. There are a couple of exceptions.

But the abundance of passages that warn against being beguiled and lead astray are far too numerous to ignore.

In fact, this very Epistle is evidence that the Gospel once received CAN be corrupted and abandoned all together – or at least for a counterfeit. I mean this is the reason FOR the epistle, for goodness sakes!

The matter is pretty clear – and as mentioned a few weeks ago – the Good News is all based on Jesus, and when people start messing with Jesus and His work, adding or taking away from Him, problems and corruptions arise.

At this point Paul, in my estimation, speaks of the Apostles of Jesus.

Now remember, those guys were called and trained by Jesus to go to other Jews. They were Jews, they were fishermen and tax collectors and they had a mindset that they were going off – it was the same message and mindset that John the Baptist showed up preaching:

“the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand! Repent and receive it before the end of this age and the wrath associated with it falls on this generation.”

Jesus told them to go to lost sheep of the house of Israel ONLY – and this attitude was ensconced into their brains.

So as mentioned, they would have certain views on things relative to the Good News that would have certainly run up against Paul and His views.

The remainder of our verses today are going to be Paul sort of explaining this, his attitude toward them, as a whole, and he will even give a particular instance where he had to call Peter out publicly for failing to “get it.”

So he adds more to his description of them, saying:

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:

To me these words undoubtedly refer to those who were the most eminent among the apostles at Jerusalem.

There is an automatic harshness in our common translation and it may not be Paul’s intention. But most of the other translations don’t help the tone: for instance:

The (BBE) reads:
“But from those who seemed to be important (whatever they were has no weight with me: God does not take man’s person into account): those who seemed to be important gave nothing new to me.”

The (Oracl) says

“Besides, from them who were of reputation, I received nothing; (whatever they were formerly, is no matter to me: God respects not a man’s appearance. For they who were of reputation, communicated nothing to me.)

The (TCNT) reads: “Of those who are thought somewhat highly of–what they once were makes no difference to me; God does not recognize human distinctions–those, I say, who are thought highly of added nothing to my Message.”

(WEB) But from those who were reputed to be important (whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God doesn’t show partiality to man)–they, I say, who were respected imparted nothing to me,

(WNT) From those leaders I gained nothing new. Whether they were men of importance or not, matters nothing to me–God recognizes no external distinctions. To me, at any rate, the leaders imparted nothing new.

(YLT) And from those who were esteemed to be something–whatever they were then, it maketh no difference to me–the face of man God accepteth not, for–to me those esteemed did add nothing,

Tindale translates this as:

“What they were in time passed, it makes no difference to me.”

If Paul was called to join ranks with the original eleven or twelve, and if he was to be sharing in the exact same approach, and if he was to make unity among the original twelve a priority it would have happened.

But he was relatively autonomous, and he appears to be almost indifferent to any of the fame or reputation of the original twelve.

This distinction is so vitally important to see and understand because to miss it is to assume a lot of things about the progression of the Gospel out into the world through apostolic influence.

Yes, Peter, James and John all wrote – but they were writing about the Jews receiving Jesus and they remaining with Him through the coming end of that age which was prophesied to end badly (and goodly, if you were his).

But Paul was not part of this crew, or as he describes them having been “in conference,”
But was instead establishing churches in Gentile parts of the world.

This call on his life seemed to require that he be somewhat of a separatist; that he would not care about the Apostles former accomplishments or experiences, and that he would feel he had the right to challenge things that they did or said.

So he says

6 But of these who seemed to “be somewhat,” (meaning to be something by reputation, and he adds:)

(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:

That parenthetical reference is intriguing, isn’t it?

(whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man’s person)

What they were, or what they might be thought to be, appear to be immaterial to Paul’s claims as an apostle, and they were immaterial to the authority of his own views as an apostle.

Remember, Paul is emphatic that he had derived his gospel from the Lord Jesus; and he had the fullest assurance that his views were just. He seems to be reiterating the idea that he had no reliance of any sort on the other apostles.

This is not a matter of disrespect, its factual. He simply did not regard them as having a right to claim an authority over him. And in light of their reputations Paul adds that it does not matter to him as

“God accepts no man’s person.”

When Peter was presented with the family of Cornelius, he said at that time:

Acts 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

He was echoing truth established 1500 years earlier as Moses wrote in

Deuteronomy 10:17 For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:

Job 34:19 How much less to him that accepteth not the persons of princes, nor regardeth the rich more than the poor? for they all are the work of his hands.

Romans 2:11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

Ephesians 6:9 And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.

Colossians 3:25 But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons.

1st Peter 1:17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear.

Because of the fulfillment perspective, many suppose that these passages are no longer applicable. I cannot help but wonder about this.

In any case, what we do know is God does NOT respect people due to their stature or status or fame or wealth. Apparently, neither does he respect those who have served Him diligently. Since this is the case, Paul does not either.

And neither should we. Toward anyone. Not Billy Graham. Not anyone. Stand before your God and he will judge – as he does with all others.

And this is something that I do not speak about too often, but we tend to think that when some of us die, God will have some explaining, and or rewarding to do, don’t we?

He lost his child, she was born without limbs, he gave all he had to the faith . . . certainly God will say . . . .

According to scripture, this would be God respecting persons. You know, giving apologies for some situation that appears unfair and or treating war heroes, or Princes, with special treatment.

Not so.

The book of Job always amazes me when Job and God finally have a conversation at the end of his trials and God is not apologetic. Instead, he puts Job on the spot with a number of crushing questions, opening with God asking Job:

Job 38:2 Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
3 Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
4 ¶ Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

And then for four chapters more of the same.

Ours is an age where human beings actually think that they have the right to call God on the carpet. The God of heaven and earth and all that in them is.

Scripture makes it clear – there is none with a status or with pain – who get such a clearance. Knowing this, Paul doesn’t seem like he was going to give any man similar respect for their status either.

In fact, Paul simply admits that their insights did not communicate anything to him that was of benefit. Instead, Paul says:

7 But contrariwise, (meaning, the exact opposite was true) “when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;”

That passage is interesting – truly – as Paul distinguishes between “the Gospel of the Uncircumcision” (which was committed to him) and the Gospel of the circumcision which was committed unto Peter.

The question we have to ask is whether these two Gospels are or were distinctions of sphere, and not a difference of type.

In other words, was there a Good News for those who were uncircumcised and a Good News for those who were not?

Since the Good News is all based on the life and work of Jesus, the answer has to be no, the Good News is the same.

However – and this is a BIG however – the APPLICATION of Jesus finished work WAS – was, demonstrably different.

It is NOT different any longer as there is no difference between Jew and Gentile in the Lord. Or bond or free or male or female.

But REMEMBER who preached this! It wasn’t Jesus. It wasn’t his original 12. It was Paul – four times in four epistles to four different churches that he founded.

Paul taught it and Paul was right to teach it. Those words would be echoed throughout history way past the day when Jerusalem fell.

But prior to the fall, the apostles called to reach the Jews and the Jews who converted to the faith assumed an entirely different application to what is the singular Good News.

For them, there was a promised Messiah, he was foretold of in their Tanakh, and in the stead of King David he came, promising them protection, salvation, and emancipation from bondage (what they thought would be emancipation from actual physical bondage but was actually bondage from sin).

This Messiah was able to do that by fulfilling the Law – something that they were all beholden too – and something that Jesus fulfilled by and through His obedience.

The application of the Good News to the Jews was to repent, be baptized, believe on Him as the promised Messiah and trust that He would actually, as their King, come back when all forces were falling upon them, and save them.

Many of them, fresh out of Judaism and still in the ongoing former age, clung to elements of the Law – dietary, dress, sabbath-day, and circumcision – as those things do NOT die quick deaths. And I would imagine that neither Peter nor John nor James pushed for any radical change.

Remember what Peter said on the day of Pentecost? Let’s rehearse it in brief:

The Apostles had spoken in a number of foreign tongue before a crowd of some 3000 plus Jews and we read at verse 12:

12 And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?
13 Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.
14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, (JEWS) and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem,(JEWS) be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel (a JEW writing to Jews)
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: (as described by Jesus to appear in that Generation, in addition to verse 20)
20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: (back to the Jews)
21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Saved from what? All the end-time elements he just described. Then Peter speaks to the crowd. Listen to his words):
22 Ye men of Israel, (Jews) hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, (Jews) as ye yourselves also know:
23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you (JEWS) have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.

Then from verses 25-35 Peter preached to them about King David (a Jew) and how the Messiah fulfilled many things promised him.

At verse 36 Peter concludes and says:

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

37 Now when they (the Jews) heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles (called to reach and preach to the Jews), Men and brethren, what shall we do?

This was always the question of the Jews – what do WE DO? What action do WE TAKE in the face of all of this information relative to us as a people and a nation?

38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, (change your minds – about what? Your relationship to the Law, your views on the Promised Messiah, you desires to love God in Spirit and in Truth) and be baptized (in water to evidence your internal commitment to these things – in front of all those here) every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call (again, from the House of Israel).
40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. (Save yourselves from what? THIS uncomely generation of souls. This generation, save yourselves from it)
41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

They were to repent -this was the first command to them/then, or as Luke puts it in Acts, citing Paul who said:

Acts 19:4 John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

And this is what Peter said to them on Pentecost – that they were to be baptized – an open outward expression of an inward faith – and THEN they received a remission of sin, expecting to receive the Holy Spirit to SAVE themselves from the generation of scoundrels that they were in.

Okay. This application is VERY different from the application of the Gospel to the Gentiles that was shared by Paul – or called, “the gospel of the uncircumcision.”

Paul had received this as his peculiar office when he was converted and called to the ministry and had remarkable success attend his labors.

We like things to cut cleanly but Peter was the one who first shared the Gospel with the Gentiles and Paul always went to the the Synagogue first in his travels.

I think this was to show that the Gospel was the same no matter the audience. But again, the application of the Gospel to these two main people groups was different.

Paul preached Christ crucified, and faith on such to the Gentiles. To believe on Him who had come.

Ac 15:11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

Ac 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Ro 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

Ro 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Ro 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

1Co 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

Ga 3:22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

Eph 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,

1Ti 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, specially of those that believe.

Once belief – “faith” – has been entered into, then the repentance or mind-changing comes into play.

It is remarkable that the word Repent appears only twice in Paul’s epistles (and they refer to repenting in another form) and that repentance is used but not nearly in the same way as it was used in the Gospels.

Then comes the baptism – as a result of being saved, not to be saved. And finally, the Holy Spirit was the one that moved in an caused the Gentiles to believe so it was not expected to come as a result of repenting and being baptized, as it was with the Jews.

To me it seems that they had evidences in scripture and the prophets that told them what to expect.

They were to repent and be baptized (to prove their repentance and willingness to receive the prophesied Messiah) and then to EXPECT that the Holy Spirit would come.

The Gentiles, touched by the Holy Spirit at the preaching of Paul and other means, would first believe because the Spirit touched them, then repent and be baptized as an outward expression.

By the way, Paul diminished the import of baptizing stating in first Corinthians that he hardly bothered with it but instead spent his time sharing the Gospel – proving that it was not part of the application of the Gospel to the Gentiles.

Okay – got all that? Paul adds at verse eight:

8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)

In other words, while God moved Peter to share the Gospel to those of the circumcision, Paul was moved (God was mighty in Him) to share the Gospel with the Gentiles or those of the uncircumcision.

At verse 9 Paul includes the fellowship he had received from the three key apostles to the circumcised, saying:

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.

The word translated pillars (stuloi) means, properly, “firm support” – so when James, Peter and John who were the firm supporters of the earliest church, who were the influencers and the authority of the earliest church – “perceived the grace that was given to Paul . . .”

Do you notice anything here? (beat) When we name these apostles we almost always give the order of Peter, James and John. It might be because Peter is two syllables and James and John are one.

Perhaps its because the papists started that tradition and so we echo it without knowing why.

But Paul doesn’t follow this order. He says,
James, Peter and John. Remember, James was the leader of the Jerusalem Church, and was the one who made the final decision on circumcision in the first Apostolic counsel, and to me, as there is often reason for the order of things in scripture, this suggests that James had taken more of a leadership role than Peter.

Paul seems to have felt that if he had the countenance of these men, the right hand of fellowship, as it were, it would be an important proof to the churches of Galatia that he had their approbation as a bona-fide apostle.

When and how (what format) James, peter and John gave Paul and Barnabas the “right hand of fellowship,” is not said but most believe that it was done at the first counsel of the Apostles described in Acts 15.

And at that counsel it was decided how the Gospel would be applied to the heathens relative to circumcision – and one other point (verse 10) where Paul adds that they said:

10 Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.

This is interesting – and in some ways, problematic – to be honest, I’m not sure what I think about it.

The reason I say this is because when Paul endeavored to collect for the poor in Judea, as reported in 2nd Corinthians, it was not pretty. In fact, Paul himself that what he was doing was not inspired or “of the Lord” – and the facts of the collections prove this completely.

And while giving to suffering folks of the faith in another part of the land can serve to keep the disparate groups united in the cause, it can also serve to create an environment of hostility and not appreciation if it is approached improperly.

Not always, but sometimes.

Because most scholars believe that the poor being referred to here were the poor Saints at Jerusalem and/or Judea as it can hardly be supposed that it would have been necessary to tell Paul to remember the poor among the Gentiles.

For the Jewish converts to receive contributions from gentile converts could certainly bring about humility and respect in their hearts for the Gentiles, but it could also bring about a sense of entitlements.

For the James, Peter and John to put this on Paul seems to contradict Jesus teachings that to trust in God to provide is the Christian way.

Unquestionably, it is most probable that the Christians in Judea were suffering the ills of poverty which rose due to some public persecution or from the fact that they were subject to the displeasure of their countrymen.

Certainly wives would be disowned by husbands; children would be disinherited by parent; and many a man might be thrown out of employment by the fact of his conversion to Christ. This goes on here in Utah everyday of the week.

To there was certainly cause. What I don’t automatically appreciate is that the three pillars put it on Paul to remember this – and Paul admitting that this was his intention and inclination to do.

In addition to all of this, the church in Judea was afflicted with famine which was reported, and even prophesied in Acts 11:30; and mentioned in Romans 15:25-27; 1st Corinthians 16:1,2; and 2nd Corinthians 8:1-7.

By Paul being interested in welfare of the Saints at Judea shows that he was not and had not been alienated from them, but was deeply interested by their well-being, which proves to his readers in Galatia that there was no schism existing between him, the apostle to the uncircumcised and the apostles of the circumcised and the circumcised themselves.

All of this information was necessary to present before Paul goes after the case in point – gentiles embracing elements of the law.

So after showing that he was received by the other apostles at Jerusalem, that they with one accord made decisions regarding the operations of the nascent church and that everything between them was peacefully established at the first Apostolic counsel at Jerusalem, Paul adds some opposing factors that existed between he and some of the others involved in the faith, saying:

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.
13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
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?

This situation will launch Paul – and us – into the remainder of the epistle to the churches as Galatia on the subject of the Law and the Faith.

Which we will get to next week.

Questions/Comments
Prayer