Untitled Sermon

Galatians 2:1-10

"Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, I'm free at last!" These wellknown words were spoken by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., at the end of his address at the 1963 March on Washington for Civil Rights. Dr. King's words conveyed something besides the joy of freedom; they also hinted at its long and hard struggle. The words were actually spoken a full century after liberty was first proclaimed for black Americans. Free at last! Finally, after centuries of bondage and enslavement. At last, after another long century of prejudice and injustice.

Our experience with slavery in America teaches that proclaiming emancipation and possessing liberty can be two very different things. Freedom isn't easily gained, and once gained, it can easily be lost.

I. The Enemies of Freedom. Freedom has as many joys and struggles in the spiritual realm as it does in the temporal. Dr. King knew this because he borrowed his famous words from an old Negro spiritual. The meaning of the song was originally about freedom from sin through Jesus Christ.

A. Freedom in Christ was Paul's concern when he wrote Galatians. He knew how precious spiritual freedom is. He knew the price that Jesus paid on the cross to gain it. He also knew how easy it is to squander that freedom and return to spiritual bondage.

B. The Galatians had gained true spiritual freedom by putting their faith in Christ crucified and Christ risen.

1. But now, they were listening to teachers who wanted to add the law of Moses to the gospel of Christ.

2. As a result, they were in danger of becoming enslaved all over again.

C. Paul's opponents were conducting covert operations in the church. They had snuck into the church to see what the Gentile Christians were up to.

1. But they were more than informants; they were slave-traders. They were conspiring to hold the church hostage to the law.

2. These men are sometimes called "the Judaizers" because they confused Judaism with Christianity.

3. They taught that Gentiles had to become Jews in order to become Christians.

4. Since they opposed Paul's law-free gospel, they could be called "the Torah police."

5. But Paul knew them for what they were: "false brothers" () - "brothers" because they claimed to be Christians, but "false" because they didn't follow Christ after all.

D. Whatever you want to call these men, they were enemies of freedom, which is why Paul took such a strong stand against them: []. Paul was a fighter for freedom. He knew that people who want to keep their freedom in Christ have to fight for it.

1. Notice that the gospel he was fighting for is not a truth; it is the truth.

2. It is the truth Jesus had in mind when He said, "You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free ().

3. There is only one Christ, one truth, and one gospel. The price of spiritual freedom is constant vigilance. It is not enough to share the gospel, or even to preach it. The gospel has to be defended.

E. It isn't an easy thing to defend the truth in an age of lies. These days, people want to make up their own good news. They don't want to hear that there is only one way of salvation. They will only put up with Christianity as long as it minds its own business.

1. So, the church is under enormous pressure to compromise her message. But, we cannot compromise! Freedom is found only in Christ!

2. Salvation only comes by His death and resurrection. We cannot let anyone add or subtract anything to or from His death and resurrection.

3. With the great reformer, Martin Luther, we say that "we can stand the loss of our possessions, our name, our life, and everything else; but we will not let ourselves be deprived of the gospel, our faith, and Jesus Christ. And that is that."

II. Titus: A Test Case. In verse 1, Paul mentions he brought Titus with him to Jerusalem. Titus was a Gentile convert, and one of Paul's co-workers. Eventually, he became a prominent leader in the early church, serving as pastor of the church in Crete.

A. Taking Titus to Jerusalem was a daring move. Because he was a Gentile instead of a Jew, Titus was uncircumcised. If there was anything that would enrage the Judaizers, it would be to bring an uncircumcised man into their holy city!

1. Circumcision meant everything to the Jews. It was the sacred mark of Jewish identity, the symbol of salvation.

2. Since the days of Abraham, circumcision had been the visible sign of belonging to God's people.

3. According to the command of God, circumcision determined whether someone was inside or outside the covenant.

B. In the past, if a Gentile decided to become a Jew, he had to be circumcised. This was what the law required.

1. Then, Paul came along with his law-free gospel, preaching the good news of the cross and the empty tomb.

2. Paul claimed that Jesus Christ had already met the requirements of the law, and circumcision no longer matters.

3. All it took to belong to God was faith in Jesus Christ. Titus served as the perfect test case for the freedom of Paul's gospel. Here was a man who had received Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior. Did he, or did he not, also have to meet the requirements of the law, epitomized by circumcision?

C. The answer the apostles gave was that Titus didn't have to be circumcised to be saved. The good news is not salvation by faith in Christ plus circumcision; the good news is salvation by faith in Christ alone.

D. Circumcision is no big controversy in the church today, but the deeper issue here is still relevant.

1. Circumcision represented law-keeping in general. So, Paul was fighting for something fundamental to Christianity at all times and in all places:

a. What does it take to become a member of God's family?

b. Is it simply a matter of faith in Christ, or is there something else, too?

2. The answer is that every Christian is saved exactly the same way: by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.

E. Christians have different gifts, of course. We have different backgrounds. We have different cultures, in some cases. We have different ministries and callings, which gives us order in the church. We have different trials and temptations.

1. But there is no difference in our standing before God.

2. If there is no difference in our standing before God, there should be no differences in our standing with one another.

III. Mission to the Gentiles.

A. What God had done in Paul's life was different from what He had done in Peter's life, and Paul knew that.

1. He was not one of the original 12 disciples. But, because they were companions of Christ during His earthly ministry, that did not make the 12 have some higher authority.

2. Paul had respect for the other apostles, but he was not intimidated by them. He didn't make a fuss over their credentials because he knew that God shows no favoritism (v. 6).

B. The other apostles didn't have to give official approval to Paul; they simply acknowledged that he already had God's approval because he was an apostle in his own right.

1. The other apostles also didn't add anything to Paul's message. They did not try to amend, edit, change, or otherwise alter his message.

2. They added nothing to it. They removed nothing from it. They changed nothing about it. They simply accepted it as it was.

C. Contrast the attitude of the apostles with that of those who were opposing Paul. The members of the Torah police taught that Paul's gospel was all right as far as it went; it just didn't go far enough.

1. They wanted to add law to faith as the basis for salvation. But the apostles understood that nothing should, or could, be added to the gospel Paul preached.

2. They knew that it is impossible to refinish the finished work of Christ.

3. The gospel proclaims that through His death and resurrection, Christ has done everything that is necessary for salvation.

4. If we were to add anything to the free and gracious gospel, it would be like taking an olympic gold medal and having it bronzed!

D. Christians are always trying to add something to the gospel. They elevate some aspect of Christianity to a place of supreme importance, so that the good news becomes faith in Christ plus something else.

IV. Partners in the Gospel.

A. The way the apostles treated one another is a model for ministry. They did all they could to avoid strife. To begin with, they were very honest with one another.

1. They also rejoiced in the talents and success of others. They weren't interested in building their own little kingdoms.

2. They knew the work of God when they saw it. They also understood that the gospel is a partnership. They recognized that each man had his own legitimate sphere of ministry.

3. Peter was to take the gospel primarily to the Jews in Judea. Paul was to primarily take the gospel to the Gentiles.

4. Although Peter sometimes evangelized Gentiles ( like Cornelius), and Paul got thrown out of his share of synagogues, each man had his own unique calling.

B. The evangelization of the world depends upon this kind of cooperation in the church. Rather than taking pride in our own ministry, we should celebrate what God is doing through others.

1. Of course, it should be understood that we celebrate it as long as we are all preaching the same gospel. This needs to be strongly emphasized.

2. Partnership in the gospel goes only as far as the gospel itself goes, and no further.

C. Each of the apostles had his own way of preaching the gospel, but whatever differences there may have been regarding experience, emphasis, or style, there was no difference in content.

1. Paul's gospel was independent, but not different. Any variations had more to do with where he was preaching than what he was preaching.

2. The gospel according to Paul and the gospel according to Peter, or John, or James was always the same gospel of free grace.

D. The principle here is that the church can allow diversity of mission only where there is unity of message.

1. The gospel itself sets the limits on our cooperation with others who call themselves Christians.

2. We are willing to compromise on many things, but we are to never compromise when it comes to the gospel message.

3. Where there is no fellowship in the gospel, there can be no partnership in mission.

V. What if Paul had Failed in his Argument for the Gospel?

A. Unless he and the other apostles were all preaching the same gospel, the church would never fulfill its mission to the world. Paul was fearful of a permanent division in the church between Jews and Gentiles.

1. To describe his fears, Paul used the illustration of a footrace. Paul knew he would complete the race, but he needed to be sure that the other apostles were also carrying the gospel baton.

2. Otherwise, his efforts would be wasted and the church would never make it to the finish line.

3. Imagine, for a moment, what would have happened if Paul had lost his fight for freedom. What would the church look like today if the first apostles had required Gentiles to become Jews in order to become Christians?

B. If Paul had failed to defend the gospel for the Gentiles, then Christians would still be following the law of Moses down to the last detail. Our salvation would depend on such things as being circumcised, keeping the OT dietary laws, and following the more obscure regulations in Leviticus.

1. The church would be imprisoned within the Jewish culture. Not that there is anything wrong within Judaism as a culture.

2. God never asked the Jews to leave their ethnic identity behind. It was fine for them to be circumcised. It was even appropriate for them to follow the law of Moses, provided they understood that they were not saved by it.

C. But, it would be wrong for Christianity to be held prisoner by Jewish culture. Christianity is multicultural as a matter of principle, which is one reason it has changed the world.

1. Part of the secret of the gospel's success is that it can be translated into any cultural context.

2. Paul rightly understood that the Gentile question would affect the entire future of Christianity.

V. Free At Last!

A. The deeper issue is the perpetual danger of adding our own requirements to the only thing God requires for salvation, which is true faith in Jesus Christ. One of the basic errors of the New Perspective on Paul and the law is that it focuses on the horizontal relationship between Jews and Gentiles to the neglect of the vertical relationship between God and sinners, which in Paul's mind was the more crucial concern.

B. When Paul contended for the theology of justification through faith in Christ alone, it was not because his primary concern was for better relations between Jews and Gentiles.

1. Actually, for Paul, the relationship between the two issues (the horizontal issue of Jewish-Gentile relations and the vertical issue of a sinner's standing before a righteous God) was exactly the opposite: he fought for spiritual freedom from Jewish regulations in order to preserve the justifying grace of God in the gospel.

2. The fight for freedom in Christ will not end until Christ returns to make us free forever. For this reason, the gospel still needs freedom fighters today.

3. These things are just as worth fighting for today as they were for Luther and all the reformers. We must fight for them!