Galatians 2 Verses 1 to 10 Liberation by Grace January 21, 2024

Galatians 2 Verses 1 to 10 Liberation by Grace January 21, 2024

Lesson 3 Class Presentation Notes AAAAA

Background Scriptures:

Malachi 3:16-17 (NKJV) 16 Then those who feared the LORD spoke to one another, And the LORD listened and heard them; So a book of remembrance was written before Him For those who fear the LORD And who meditate on His name. 17 "They shall be Mine," says the LORD of hosts, "On the day that I make them My jewels. And I will spare them As a man spares his own son who serves him."

Main Idea: Grace creates fellowship with like-minded believers

Study Aim: To understand that the church is not an organization, rather a living organism, The Body of Christ.

Create Interest:

· For many of us, our preferred way of dealing with conflict is not to deal with it at all. We ignore it and hope the conflict goes away on its own. While there are some conflicts that may be minor enough to dissipate on their own, many do not. Some conflicts we should walk away from, in the sense of letting go of what we want in the matter. Some issues, however, we should not compromise on, give in, walk away from, or ignore them. When conflict is caused because of an issue of biblical right and wrong, it’s time to stand our ground.

· To Paul, his spiritual liberty in Christ was worth far more than popularity or even security. He was willing to fight for that liberty. Paul’s first fight for Christian liberty was at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:1–35; Gal. 2:1–10); his second was at a private meeting with Peter (Gal. 2:11–21). Had Paul been unwilling to wage this spiritual warfare, the church in the first century might have become only a Jewish sect, preaching a mixture of Law and grace. But because of Paul’s courage, the Gospel was kept free from legalism, and it was carried to the Gentiles with great blessing.[1]

Lesson in Historical Context:

· The bane of Paul’s life and ministry was the insidious activity of false teachers. Wherever he went, they dogged his footsteps. No sooner had he planted the gospel in some locality, than false teachers began to trouble the church by perverting it. Further, as we have seen, to discredit Paul’s message, they also challenged his authority.

· This matter is of importance for us because Paul’s detractors have plenty of successors in the Christian church today. They tell us that we do not need to pay too much attention to his writings. They forget or deny that he was an apostle of Jesus Christ, uniquely called, commissioned, authorized, and inspired to teach in His name. They ignore Paul’s own claim (1:11, 12) that he derived his gospel not from men but from Jesus Christ.

· One of the ways in which some false teachers of Paul’s day tried to undermine his authority was to hint that his gospel was different from Peter’s, and indeed from the views of all the other apostles in Jerusalem. ‘As a result, they said, ‘the church is being saddled with two gospels, Paul’s and Peter’s, each claiming a divine origin. Which are we going to accept?’ ‘Surely’, they went on, ‘we cannot follow Paul if he is in a minority of one, and if Peter and the rest of the apostles disagree with him?’ This was evidently one of the specious arguments of the Judaizers. They were trying to disrupt the unity of the apostolic circle. They were openly alleging that the apostles contradicted one another. Their game, we might say, was not ‘robbing Peter to pay Paul’, but exalting Peter to spite Paul!

· To this insinuation Paul now addresses himself. He has shown in chapter 1that his gospel came from God not man. He now shows in the first part of chapter 2 that his gospel was precisely the same as that of the other apostles; it was not different. To prove that his gospel was independent of the other apostles, he has stressed that he paid only one visit to Jerusalem in fourteen years, and that this lasted only fifteen days. To prove that his gospel was yet identical with theirs, he now stresses that when he paid a proper visit to Jerusalem, his gospel was endorsed and approved by them.

Let us consider the circumstances of this visit to Jerusalem.[2]

Bible Study:

Galatians 2:1 (NKJV) Paul’s second journey to Jerusalem 1 Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me.

Vs. 1: Paul says his next visit to Jerusalem was not for another fourteen years. We do not know if the fourteen years later refers to fourteen years after his conversion or after his first visit to Jerusalem. Paul says he and Barnabas went up together and that he took Titus with him.

· Barnabas and Paul had a functional partnership—Paul must have trusted Barnabas to share his views, or he would not have wanted him present at the Jerusalem meeting. At this stage of his ministry Paul identifies Barnabas as his ally in evangelizing the gospel to the Gentiles (see also 2:9). His trust in Barnabas is clear in 1 Corinthians 9:6 as well.

o This makes the fact that Barnabas does not see the significance of Peter’s behavior at Antioch (2:13) more distressing for Paul.

· The Greek reads as if Titus has less seniority than Barnabas, for Paul writes that he takes Titus along (symparalabōn). The rest of Paul’s letters indicate, however, that he trusted Titus with the most delicate of tasks, such as work on the collection project (2 Cor. 8:6).

o The way Paul mentions Titus may also signal that the apostle intentionally took Titus, an uncircumcised Greek, along to confront the Jerusalem church leaders with the matter of uncircumcised believers.

o Paul’s special commitment to bringing Titus is signaled in the Greek text of 2:3, which suggests that Paul did so primarily because Titus was a “Greek.”

§ By taking Titus along Paul demonstrates to the Jerusalem church his conviction that Jews and Gentiles are one in Christ.

§ Paul may well be setting up a subtle contrast between his actions and those of Peter, which he will shortly denounce (2:11–14).

§ Whereas in Paul’s view Peter at Antioch acted hypocritically in front of the people from Jerusalem, the apostle commends himself to the Galatians as one who has the courage of his convictions.[3]

Galatians 2:2 (NKJV) Paul defended the work of the Gospel 2 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.

· Vs. 2: Paul went to Jerusalem on his second visit in response to a revelation. That is, he went because God directed him to, not because the Jerusalem leaders had summoned him or called him “on the carpet” for preaching to the Gentiles. The reference may well be to Agabus’ prophecy of a famine which prompted Paul and Barnabas to go to Jerusalem on a relief mission (cf. Acts 11:27–30).

o Paul seized this opportunity to consult with the other apostles privately concerning the message he was preaching to the Gentiles.

§ This does not mean Paul sought their approval of its truth and accuracy, for he had received the gospel from God by revelation. Rather, he wanted them to consider its relationship to the gospel they were proclaiming. But if the Jerusalem leaders insisted on circumcision and other requirements of the Law for Gentile converts, Paul’s labor (running) among the Gentiles was in vain.

§ It was not that the apostle had any doubts or misgivings about the gospel he had preached for 14 years (Gal. 2:1), but that he feared that his past and present ministry might be hindered or rendered of no effect by the Judaizers.[4]

Let’s pause here and learn more about the Judaizers before moving on

· If you get no further than this, please focus here for clarity and the rest of the lesson will make sense to you.

· Judaizers—Legalists: these were Jews who professed Christ but still hung on to their Judaist religion, in particular to the rite of circumcision and to the law of Moses (see Acts 5:1–35, esp. 1, 24–29). They believed a man became a Christian …

o by first becoming a Jew. The man was to embrace Judaism with all its rituals and ceremonies and be circumcised, and begin to obey the laws of Moses

o then the man could accept Christ as his Savior

o In the mind of the circumcised, Christianity was a mixture of Judaism and the teachings of Christ. The law was just as important as Christ and Christ was no more important than the law. …. They failed to grasp the following:

o that Christ was the fulfillment of the law.

o that Christ had kept the law perfectly, thereby becoming the Ideal Man, the Perfect Pattern of what every man should be.

o that Christ was not only the embodiment of the law, but so much more—the very embodiment of God Himself, the Ideal Man, the Perfect Pattern to whom all men were to look for their salvation and standard.

o that Christ, as the Son of God, as the Ideal Man, and as the Perfect Pattern, was the One to whom all men were now to look and obey.

· Some Jews were impressed with Christ and professed Him, but they were never able to understand or else were unwilling to accept Christ as the fulfillment of the law and as the Savior of all men. Therefore, they never turned to Christ alone, never broke away …

o from their legalistic religion

o from requiring men (Gentiles) to become Jews before they could become Christians

· This was the great battle the church had to fight in its beginning. It was the great problem that faced God: how to break the church away from its Judaistic roots and away from excluding and shutting out the other people of the world (Gentiles).

· This had always been the problem of the Jews—the problem of keeping the Gentiles away from God and the glorious salvation He had planned for all men.

· Now, since Christ had come, God had to lead the early church away from the Judaistic approach, away from making a man become a Jew before he could accept Christ. This just was not the will of God, for God had sent Christ into the world to save all men, not just the Jews.

· The message had to be carried to all. He had to break the early Jewish believers away from their legalism, away from their …

o making distinctions between themselves and others.

o making others become religionists before accepting Christ.

o discriminating against others.

o building barriers and walls for others to cross (legalistic rules).

o being separatists and being divisive.

o being a people of prejudice and bigotry.

Does any of this remind you of our world today?????

· However, note this: All through the history of the church, extending from the early church up to the present time, there have been some who have refused to follow Christ alone.

o They have laid the burden of the law, ritual, and ceremony (legalism, becoming a religionist, a Jew) upon people. In the past such people were known as the circumcision or the Judaizers; in modern times they are known as religionists or legalists.[5]

Let’s move on

Galatians 2:3-5 (NKJV) Paul defended the Gospel against false believers 3 Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. 4 And this occurredbecause of false 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 into bondage), 5 to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.

· How did “those who were of reputation” respond (2:2)? Paul writes, “But not even Titus, who was with me, though he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised” (2:3).

· One of the urgent challenges that incited Paul to write Galatians was that Judaizers in Galatia were compelling the Galatians to be circumcised(6:12). The point is that even in the center of Judaism, in the presence of the original Jewish followers of Jesus, surrounded by the most Law-loving Jews in the world, nobody compelled Gentile believers to be circumcised.

o What sense would it make, then, for the Judaizers to insist on enforcing the rite of circumcision for Gentile believers living in the remote regions of Galatia?

o Paul then zooms in on the opponents he had been trying to avoid in Jerusalem (2:4–5). Commentator James Boice notes that Paul’s descriptors of the “false brethren” constitute a “military metaphor, used to indicate the subversive and militant nature of the evil that Paul was fighting.” “Secretly” … “sneaked” … “spy” … “bondage.”

o Paul saw himself in the midst of a life-and-death battle, striving to protect a priceless treasure: the gospel of Jesus Christ.

§ Judaizing spies whose loyalty remained with the old Law of Judaism were merely playing the part of followers of Christ, having infiltrated the ranks of the church to destroy the doctrine of grace from the inside out.

§ And the best way to destroy graceis to enslave believers with a strenuous religious system including:

📷 prerequisites for meriting salvation;

📷 rituals to receive salvation; and

📷 righteous works to maintain salvation.[6]

Thoughts to soak on:

· There is a battle behind this passage; and it seems likely that the leaders of the Church urged Paul, for the sake of peace, to give in, in the case of Titus. But he (Paul) stood like a rock. He knew that to yield would be to accept the slavery of the law and to turn his back on the freedom which is in Christ.[7]

o Titus was a full Gentile, and to have had him circumcised would have undercut the gospel of grace and made him a monument of victory for the Judaizers.

o And if Gentile believers were not compelled to be circumcised in Jerusalem, which was still home base for most of the apostles, how could they be required to be circumcised in their home countries? Henceforth Titus was a living verification that the Judaizers taught a spurious gospel that was rejected by the rest of the church.[8]

Let’s pause here and learn three things about Paul’s second trip to Jerusalem after his conversion to add clarity to our study:

· First, he didn’t go there in order to learn the gospel; he already knew it. He went because God told him to, perhaps through a prophetic ‘revelation’ (see Acts 11:27–30).

· Second, he explained to the Jerusalem apostles what it was that he was preaching in the Gentile world, to maintain his unity with what was still the heartland of Christian faith.

· Third, there had been what he calls some ‘false family members’, a phrase which he perhaps means as a contemptuous reversal of what they themselves had been saying about Titus.

o They were, he says, smuggled in to see what this part of the movement looked like, to see who these people were who claimed to follow Jesus but who didn’t bother about keeping the law of Moses.

o Yes, there were some such, says Paul; but I didn’t give way to them for a moment. What was and is at stake is ‘the truth of the gospel’.

· Why? And this is a Big Point! Because the gospel is the announcement that the crucified and risen Jesus is Lord of the world.

o And if He is Lord of the whole world, then those who believe in Him, who give allegiance to Him, must form a single family.

o There cannot be divisions based on nationhood or race.

· If the church had learned this from Paul, instead of conveniently forgetting it, many troubles in today’s world might have been averted.[9]

Galatians 2:6 (NKJV) Paul defended the Gospel against any and all persons 6 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 somethingadded nothing to me.

· 2:6 Paul drew a sharp distinction between the false brothers he had just characterized in such a derogatory way (the sneaks and spies of vv. 3–5) and the church leaders with whom he had come to Jerusalem to confer. The former clearly were pseudo-Christians and minions of Satan; the latter, on the other hand, were respected leaders and dialogue partners with Paul in this strategic missionary summit.

· On four occasions within the scope of seven verses Paul used a form of the verb dokein, “to seem,” “to appear,” to describe his interlocutors(those with whom he was having a dialogue) at the Jerusalem meeting. In v. 2 he referred to them simply as those who seemed or appeared, the word “leaders” being supplied by the NIV translators. Here in v. 6 these same persons are identified as “those who seemed to be important,” or, more literally, those who seem to be something. At the end of the verse the earlier designation of 2:2 is repeated and simply rendered by the NIV as “those men.”[10]

· Paul was not even concerned about finding out what their position was. God is not impressed by a man’s office. And when it came down to the bottom line, these men had absolutely nothing to add to him.

o They told him nothing that he did not already know.

o They were certainly in no position to give him any new commission.

o Nor could they subtract a single word from the gospel that he had been set apart by God to preach.

o They had been commissioned to begin at Jerusalem and all Judea, then to evangelize Samaria, and to reach out to the uttermost parts of the earth (Acts 1:8). Well, they had achieved success in Jerusalem and Judea. Samaria had been evangelized—but by one of the deacons, not by one of the apostles.

o And, as for “the uttermost parts of the earth,” they had done little or nothing about that.[11]

· Galatians 2:7-10 (NKJV) Paul defended the call given each minister to proclaim the Gospel truthfully as Jesus gave it to them. 7 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter 8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), 9 and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived 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. 10 They desired only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do.

· Vs. 7-8: The gospel of the uncircumcision. The duty of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised part of the world; that is, to the Gentiles. Paul had received this as his peculiar office when he was converted and called to the ministry (see Acts 9:15; 22:21); and they now perceived that he had been specially entrusted with this office, from the remarkable success which had attended his labors.

· It is evidently not meant here that Paul was to preach only to the Gentiles and Peter only to the Jews, for Paul often preached in the synagogues of the Jews, and Peter was the first who preached to a Gentile (Acts 10). Note:

o Acts 10:28 (NKJV) Upon Peter entering Cornelius’ house 28 Then he (Peter) said to them, "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 common or unclean.

§ It is meant that it was the mainbusiness of Paul to preach to the Gentiles, or that this was especially entrusted to him.

§ As was the office of preaching the gospel to the Jews entrusted to Peter.

· Peter was to preach principally to the circumcised Jews. It is evident that until this time Peter had been principally employed in preaching to the Jews.

o Paul selects Peter here particularly, doubtless because he was the oldest of the apostles, and to show that he was himself regarded as on a level in regard to the apostleship with the most aged and venerable of those who had been called to the apostolic office by the personal ministry of the Lord Jesus.[12]

o Could the following have been in Peter’s mind in this meeting with Paul?

§ Acts 11:17 (NKJV) 17 If therefore God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?"

· Vs. 9-10: Paul appeals to their status: “those who were held in high esteem” (2:6; see also 2:2) and “those esteemed to be pillars” (2:9). He names them, and everyone agrees these are the major players: Peter (Cephas), James, and John.

o He makes it clear again their status doesn’t matter to him because his message is from God (2:6: “whatever they were makes no difference to me”).

· The happy result of this conference was that 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 (9).

o Listing first the name of James (the brother of Jesus) suggests that he was the leader of the church—perhaps in administration—

o while Peter was the leader of the missionary work to the Jews. These men took positive action.

o Paul and Barnabas were given the recognized pledge of friendship and agreement, the right hands of fellowship. In the light of this total and unquestioned approval, how could Paul’s authority be questioned?[13]

o He states that “they added nothing to his message”—backing up to what they did not do. He then states what they did do:

§ “they recognized” (2:7),

§ that “God … was also at work in me as an apostle to the Gentiles” (2:8),

§ that they “gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship” (2:9) by endorsing the “grace [gift] given to me” (2:9),

§ they “agreed” on equal but separate missions (2:9),

§ and they asked him to find support for the poor in Jerusalem (2:10).

· Each of these actions alone embodies official endorsement of the Pauline mission which include but not limited to:

o preaching the gospel to gentiles,

o forming churches made up of Judean and gentile believers,

o not requiring gentile converts to Jesus to observe the whole law of Moses.

· The apostles of Jerusalem’s church—and this is as close as the church got to the Vatican in the first century—endorsed and embraced the Pauline gospel mission.

· Vs. 10. Remember the poor.—Of the Jewish Christians in Judea then distressed. Paul’s past care for their poor prompted this request. His subsequent zeal in the same cause was the answer to their appeal (Acts 11:29, 30; Rom. 15:26, 27; 1 Cor. 16:3; 2 Cor. 9:1; Acts 24:17).[14]

So, let’s wrap up what we have learned

· Events can tell the whole story.

o The event of not requiring Titus to be circumcised and the event of endorsing Paul’s mission tells the story that gentile believers don’t have to observe the law of Moses.

§ Therefore, the critics of Paul who were persuading and even coercing (2:3, 14; 6:12) gentile believers to undergo Israel’s covenant rite were wrong about the very truth of the gospel![15]

What are some lasting truths from Galatians 2:6–10?

· All persons stand as equals before the Lord.

· The Lord uses different people in different ways to His glory.

· Believers are to stand hand-in-hand and encourage one another in their ministries.[16]

· Only those circumcised in their hearts will be true Israelites and heirs to the promises (Romans 2:28f.). “Neither circumcision availed anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature” (Galatians 6:15).

[1]Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, vol. 1 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996), 689–690. [2]John R. W. Stott, The Message of Galatians: Only One Way, The Bible Speaks Today (Leicester, England; Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1986), 39–40. [3]L. Ann Jervis, Galatians, Understanding the Bible Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book, 2011), 50. [4]Donald K. Campbell, “Galatians,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck, vol. 2 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 593. [5]Leadership Ministries Worldwide, Galatians–Colossians, The Preacher’s Outline & Sermon Bible (Chattanooga, TN: Leadership Ministries Worldwide, 1996), 26–27. [6]Charles R. Swindoll, Galatians, Ephesians, Swindoll’s Living Insights New Testament Commentary (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 2015), 39–40. [7]William Barclay, ed., The Letters to the Galatians and Ephesians, The Daily Study Bible Series (Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster John Knox Press, 1976), 16–17. [8]John F. MacArthur Jr., Galatians, MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1983), 38. [9]Tom Wright, Paul for Everyone: Galatians and Thessalonians (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2004), 16–17. [10]Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 154. [11]John Phillips, Exploring Galatians: An Expository Commentary, The John Phillips Commentary Series (Kregel Publishers; WORDsearch Corp., 2009), Ga 2:6. [12]Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament: II Corinthians & Galatians, ed. Robert Frew (London: Blackie & Son, 1884–1885), 309–310. [13]R. E. Howard, “The Epistle to the Galatians,” in Galatians through Philemon, Beacon Bible Commentary (Beacon Hill Press, 2020), Ga 2:6–10. [14]George Barlow, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, I & II Thessalonians, The Preacher’s Complete Homiletic Commentary (New York; London; Toronto: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1892), 25. [15]Scot McKnight, James and Galatians, New Testament Everyday Bible Study Series (Grand Rapids, MI: HarperChristian Resources, 2022), 137–138. [16]Ronald K. Brown, Bible Studies for Life, Fall 2013, Herschel Hobbs Commentary: (LifeWay Christian Resources, 2013), 106.