What was the whole point of the letter to Galatia? - Lesson 15

After just over 4 months of breaking Paul's letter to the synagogues in Galatia down, comparing it to other writings, and to Old Testament scripture references, I decided that a summary lesson was in order.  All of this information is, in some way, included within one of the previous 14 chapters.  I have thoroughly enjoyed this study.  Tackling this study without relying on someone else's commentary has been an incredible journey. God has brought me on a journey that cannot compare to any journey or study I have ever done before.  I am very humbled by the lessons He taught me, and I pray that I have transposed those lessons adequately enough to teach others in such a way that God would be pleased.  I cannot take credit for any of the knowledge, as I feel every step of the way God directed my lessons and exposed supporting scriptures to me that I would not have found on my own.  

Author:

Paul of Tarsus.  Jewish, zealous Pharisee, son of a Pharisee, studied directly under Rabi Gamaliel, well educated, held legal Roman citizenship, from the tribe of Benjamin.

When:

Historically considered to have been written around the late 40’s or early 50’s CE.  Certainly written before the Jerusalem council of Acts 15, or this Paul’s letter to Galatia would have referenced that decision.  Most likely written to correspond with the trip written in Acts 11:27-30, which describes a prophecy of famine that corresponds to a revelation being the reason Paul referenced in Galatians 2:2.  Some disagree and claim that Paul’s trip in Galatians 2:2 is the Jerusalem council recorded in Acts 15.  The major argument against this idea is that in this same verse, Paul claims his visit was private.  The Jerusalem Council was definitely not private, as “The apostles and the elders were gathered together” (Acts 15:6).

Intended audience:

Paul wrote to the uncircumcised Gentile Messiah believers in the synagogues of Galatia.  The theme of the entire letter is justification by faith and not through works.  The argument, with multiple proof texts from the Old Testament, is that salvation comes from faith, as Abraham’s faith was counted as righteousness (Gal 3:6 and Gen 15:6) before circumcision.  This repetitive theme naturally leads to the conclusion that, even though this letter would have been read to the entire synagogue as a matter of practice, the intended audience was to reassure the uncircumcised Gentile believers that circumcision, or legal Jewish conversion, was not necessary for salvation.

It would make perfect sense that even though the intended audience was the uncircumcised Gentiles that Paul was writing to also prove his point to the others within the assembly. 

Why:

Up to this time, before the Jerusalem Leadership Council had issued their official ruling on the matter, it was the common belief that salvation was only reserved for Jews and it was required to be sealed by the sign of the covenant with Abraham, which was circumcision.  Jewish culture had taken a turn identifying their ethnic group as being saved, excluding all others.  To the point that they had laws that forbid even associating with Gentiles (Acts 10:28). 

What:

Paul, through a revelation, then through scripture, found evidence proving that salvation was for all that believed in God, contrary to the common teaching that salvation required Jewish conversion (circumcision).  He used Genesis 15:6 as his foundational proof text, that Abraham’s faith was counted as righteousness, by God, approximately 15 years before the command of circumcision was given.  He built upon that argument quoting from Genesis 12:3, 18:18, and/or 22:18.  Each of those passages claims that “all of the nations on earth will by blessed” through Abraham’s faith. 

Peter was the first to receive a vision that “God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.” (Acts 10:34-35)  For whatever reason, Paul was ultimately chosen, above anyone else, through revelation, to deliver this message to the Gentiles.  However, there was great significance that Peter and Paul received the same revelation regarding Gentiles, because it was their combined testimony, and Paul’s interpretation of Genesis, that later served as the argument which resulted in the Jerusalem Leadership Council’s decision in Acts 15, stating that Gentiles were not required to undergo circumcision or legal conversion.  But remember that ruling in Acts 15 occurred sometime after Paul wrote this letter to Galatia, otherwise this letter would have been unnecessary, and the Jerusalem Council’s decision would have been the letter instead.

With that in mind, Paul laid out his argument through his letter, using different scripture references from what we now call the Old Testament.  Paul’s theme and point is always that justification (righteousness or salvation) is not from the law.

·         “yet we know that person is not justified by works of the law” (Galatians 2:16)

·         “Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law” (Galatians 3:11)

·         “For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight” (Romans 3:20)

·         “not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law” (Philippians 3:9)

Paul was very clear that salvation came through faith.

·         “yet we know that person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ” (Galatians 2:16)

·         “And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith” (Galatians 3:8)

·         “So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.” (Galatians 3:9)

·         “For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith.” (Galatians 3:26)

·         “For in the righteousness of God is revealed from faith” (Romans 1:17)

·         “the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe” (Romans 3:22)

·         “Therefore since we have been justified by faith” (Romans 5:1)

·         “For by grace you have been saved through faith.” (Ephesians 2:8)

The most common mistake is to generalize Paul’s message that the law itself is not valid, not needed, not required, or even worse not relevant.  On very close inspection of Paul’s writing it is easy to find that he does not write against the law or claim that the law is no longer valid or relevant.  Paul’s message is very specific to salvation from the law, not obedience as a lifestyle.  Contrary to this generalized misunderstanding, Paul wrote many references throughout his letters, including one instance recorded in Acts 21 in which he undergoes a purification ceremony to prove that he is not teaching against the law. 

·         “Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not!” (Galatians 3:21)

·          “So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.” (Romans 7:12)

·         “For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being.” (Romans 7:22)

·         “Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.” (Romans 3:21)

·         “I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets” (Acts 24:14) – {written by Luke, but quoting Paul’s words}

·         “What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means!” (Romans 7:7)

Paul’s writing style, combined with our lack of understanding about the culture at that time, make it easy to misunderstand his intent or meaning.  Peter warned,

“And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letter when he speaks in them of these matters.  There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do other Scriptures.  You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.” (2 Peter 3:15-17)

As with any other scripture, it is necessary to read the full context, which includes the “who, what, why, where, when” questions surrounding the entire passage.  This may seem very tedious and perhaps overwhelming, however, how else are we to understand God’s message correctly if we do not do our complete homework?  We have all probably heard someone use one specific verse, or partial verse, out of context.  It is written that even Satan, the great deceiver, used God’s word out of context.  He did this with Eve successfully and unsuccessfully with Jesus.  The difference is that Eve did not consider all of God’s word (verbal promise only at that point), nor did she seek God’s council, but attempted to inject her own logic. Jesus, on the other hand, corrected Satan’s incorrect logic and twisting of scripture because he knew the whole word intimately. 

Paul’s message to the believers in Galatia was quite clear to them at the time, but has become muddied to us, not living in that culture.  His message was to overturn the theology of the day that salvation was reserved for only Jews or legally converted proselytes.  That theology had come from years of misunderstood scripture, turned into manmade ordinances or traditions, which Jesus also made part of his mission to differentiate from God’s word.

I imagine that if Paul were to write this letter today, the message would be something of the sort:

“Greetings brothers and sisters.  It has been brought to my attention that there are some among you still teaching a false doctrine, contrary to the word of God.  The tradition of church history has placed salvation within the scope of baptism.  How much more contrary could this be than to the word of God?  Who is twisting God’s word in such a way and why would you be so naïve to consider that this is worthy of your consideration?

As it is written, Jesus offered salvation to the thief on the cross, through faith because of his belief and sincere remorse and repentance within his heart.  Do you see it written that this man was taken down from his crucifixion to be baptized, in order that Jesus’ promise would be fulfilled to this man for salvation?  Certainly not!  This thief was offered salvation, separate from any baptism.

Therefore, those among you teaching that your salvation stands within your baptism are evil influencers, teaching a gospel based on traditions within the church, and not based on the word of God.  Shame on you!  Do you believe that your own works of submersion are more important than the internal work of the heart?  Do you find that your own works have more merit than God’s grace?  You are teaching a false doctrine, based on your own traditions and ordinances.  Can your works of submersion clean a man’s heart?  Will your external cleansing be eternal compared to the cleansing of another man’s faith which cleanses internally?

Therefore brothers and sisters, stand firm in your salvation, apart from your baptism.  Have peace that you are saved, through faith, by grace, and not from your own work of submersion. “

In the above example, I did not once claim that baptism was bad.  I claimed that baptism as a means to salvation was wrong.  The distinction is subtle, but very different.  Paul’s message, I believe, is similar, within the context of the culture at that time.  Paul did not preach against circumcision or following the law, as a general practice, but against it as a means to salvation.

Interestingly, Paul reminded the readers that he was not being persecuted because he was teaching that Jesus was the Messiah.  He was being persecuted because of his message that being Jewish, and/or following the law was not the means to salvation.  “But if I, brothers, still preach circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been removed.” (Galatians 5:11)  That is to say, he was being persecuted because he did not teach circumcision was required for salvation.  “The offense of the cross” means that he was not being persecuted because of his teaching that Jesus was the Messiah.  In fact, it was tolerated to consider Jesus as the Messiah.  It was definitely an allowed theology.  Consider Gamaliel’s point in Acts 5:33-39. It was acceptable for Jews to consider that a messiah would come, after all, that was written in the prophecies. If it was from man it would fall apart, but if it was from God, no one could stop it.  Other men had been considered the messiah before Jesus, but the prophecy proved false because it was not from God.

Galatians, to us, is a book of the bible.  Typically, when we read this, we consider it part of the collection of scripture, instructions, directives and, usually, we read these letters as though they were written for us and to us.  The reality is that all of the epistles, were letters, written to address a specific issue or set of issues that were relevant to a specific audience living in a specific culture at a specific time in history.  Many of these writings can be interpreted and applied to our lives today, but it is imperative to apply the full context of the meaning.

As I said, we see the letter to Galatia as a book of the bible, but the reality is that it was a letter, transcribed from Paul’s mouth through a writer, by hand, with ink and a quill, onto a parchment of some type.  We have the advantage of seeing this in a collection with several other historical accounts, letters, and all other scripture, with footnotes leading us to other scripture references, the publisher’s footnotes, along with chapter and verse break down.  Sometimes this is an advantage.  At other times, it may be a disadvantage.  We rely on these footnotes and reference points, and use the chapter and verse breakdown to take apart the letters and use pieces of it here and there to fit a lesson, sermon, or theology.  Those receiving this letter would have read it as a letter, just like you would read a letter today, received in the mail from your grandmother. The whole letter is a complete message.  That letter may contain bits and pieces that could be used as quips or quotes from grandma when reminiscing, but the whole letter is important as a complete message.