A Verse-by-Verse Examination of Galatians
“Then after fourteen years I again went up to Yerushalayim, with Barnabah, taking Titus along too. And I went up by revelation, and laid before them that Good News which I proclaim among the gentiles, but separately to those who were esteemed, lest somehow I run, or had run, in vain. But not even Titus who was with me, though a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. But as for the false brothers, sneakingly brought in, who sneaked in to spy out our freedom which we have in Messiah Yahoshuah in order to enslave us, to these we did not yield in subjection, not even for an hour, so that the truth of the Good News remains with you.” (2:1-5).
After fourteen years? Much time has passed in this accounting. Paul shared with each group separately so as not to offend. (Take typical pagan gentiles, and put them in a room with fervent truth seeking Jews, and they will at best tolerate each other, but not each other’s ideas. Paul was wise in this, but it is a simple wisdom that would come with but one encounter of both.)
Paul is no longer young in the faith, and has likely grown weary of the same arguments. I know I have. Each of us has these, and so did Paul. Bris Milah, or ritual circumcising, was one such argument. He starts off by saying that even a person walking with him had not felt the need. While Titus may not have wanted to yet, Paul did circumcise Timothy in Acts 16:1-3 because all the Jews knew Timothy’s dad was Greek, and he did not want the testimony ruined. Remember this.
Paul then mentions false brothers. I have seen many of these. The few men from Judea who were causing the ruckus here were Pharisees (like Paul) who believed in the Messiah, but worked secretly as Torah breakers who pushed the Torah. Many Christians look down on these people, but they themselves are often no different. Today many in the church push the Ten Commandments, but they themselves do not keep them, as we have already seen.
These false ones, whose denomination was in trouble because of the Truth, wanted to see what Paul and the others were free from so they could bring the snare to their door once more. While Paul says they did not stumble for even an hour … he does not say what all the freedom was from, or with what they were trying to enslave, save circumcision. Are we freed from this? What would a Jewish Berean of old do? They would look to the Scriptures!
“To whom shall I speak and give warning, so that they hear? See, their ear is uncircumcised, and they are unable to listen. See, the Word of Yahoweh is a reproach to them, they do not delight in it.” (Jeremiah 6:10). Some translations render this as, “Who will listen to Me?” Well, not too many people, but quite a few will listen to Paul, or at least make him say what they want him to. Will we listen to Yahoweh?
“Thus said the Master Yahoweh, ‘No son of a foreigner, uncircumcised in heart or uncircumcised in flesh, comes into My set-apart place, even any son of a foreigner who is among the children of Yisra’el.’” (Ezekiel 44:9). No uncircumcised foreigner, in heart and flesh. None. (See also Exodus 12:48).
What does the Good News Himself say?
“If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the Torah of Mosheh should not be broken, are you wroth with Me because I made a man entirely well on the Sabbath?” (John 7:23). The Messiah isn’t angry with circumcision; He approves it quite clearly; He even notes it as a form of healing.
What else does Paul say since we can, according to his own words, test his words with his words?
“The circumcision is naught, and the uncircumcision is naught, but the guarding of the commands of Elohim does matter!” (1 Corinthians 7:19). Yet, keeping Yahoweh’s commands would involve circumcision! Also, this goes on to state that if you were a slave when you were called, then do not worry about it but to become free if you can. If you view this as a Berean would (they were Jews), or as one who looks to the recordings of the Messiah, or by comparison to Paul’s other writings, then something is missing. Perhaps there is more at hand than mere circumcision. Did they add something to the Torah of Yahoweh? Is this in regards to a ritualistic conversion? Or are they trying to earn salvation? Could the term circumcision have multiple meanings ascribed to it? Let’s read on.
“But from those who were esteemed to be whatever—what they were, it makes no difference to me, Elohim shows no partiality—for those who were esteemed contributed naught to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the Good News to the uncircumcised had been entrusted to me, even as Kepha to the circumcised—for He Who worked in Kepha to make him an emissary to the circumcised also worked in me for the gentiles.
So when Ya’aqob, Kepha, and Yohanan, who seemed to be supports, came to know the favour that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, in order that we go to the gentiles and they to the circumcised, only that we might remember the poor, which I myself was eager to do.” (2:6-10).
After letting off a bit of steam about false brothers, Paul continues right on with business.
Gentiles, those of other faiths and thus being uncircumcised, have just as much need for a Saviour as anyone, including those who the Saviour came for, the Jewish people, and all who would follow Him. Peter brought the message to the Jewish people as well as to the Gentiles, such as Cornelius in Acts 10, and he also wrote to the Galatians in first and second Peter, and even though Paul says he ministers only to Gentiles, he also went to the synagogue every Sabbath and spoke with Jews and gentiles there. They had their specialties I presume, but they never excluded the hungry from spiritual food. Neither should we.
James, Peter, and John came to know Paul and his companions, though they already knew and trusted Barnabah (see Acts 4:36 and 9:27), and found them to be trustworthy. These comrades banded together and fellowshipped. … Fellowship? They got to share with each other all their trials and joys, they would have broke bread together and undoubtedly kept the Sabbath and festivals with each other often, as that would have been considered the prime root of fellowship, and in truth, still is today.
“Eager to remember the poor.” By saying, “remember,” I wonder if what Paul meant was to give to them something worth more than gold, the Good News of Messiah, and to also give them their daily needs. A kindness all too often overlooked, and a joy sadly almost never felt today. (See Leviticus 25:35-38 and Psalms 72:13, 34:17).
Paul went to Peter to ask about circumcision as he and the Pharisees were in dispute in Acts 15:1-3. Some thought it mandatory for salvation as the Talmud instructs, which is given the name Torah of Moses by the Pharisees. Paul didn’t know, but agreed to go ask an elder of his, Peter. Therefore, what Peter has to say ought be considered of great worth.
“And when Kepha had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was at fault. For before some came from Ya’aqob, he was eating with the gentiles, but when they came, he began to withdraw and separate himself, in fear of those of the circumcision. And the rest of the Yahudim joined him in hypocrisy, so that even Barnabah was led away by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they are not walking straight according to the truth of the Good News, I said to Kepha before them all, ‘If you, being a Yahudite, live as a gentile and not as the Yahudim, why do you compel gentiles to live as Yahudim?” (2:11-14).
Here we see Paul corrected what seems to be a mistake of Peter’s. I have heard a few men think ill of Peter after reading this. Now I know none of us would be at fault for making a mistake, would we? I often see this event played out in just the opposite manner. Gentiles will leave their Jewish brothers and sisters to go hang out with gentiles. Had Paul seen this instead, then the names would be different, but the message probably the same. Yet, there is a problem with Paul’s reaction here. Bear in mind: Paul is not the Messiah. Some people forget that—they consider Paul unable to do any wrong. Let’s take a look at this scenario:
The Jews were a little late getting to the gathering, and, when they came in, Peter went to sit with his brothers. I would too. Why? They’re my brothers! They just got there. Anyone would. Peter may have had close friends there, and, whether he actually was or not, he had a right to be hesitant around the Pharisees, since they, like many Christians, become enraged when you don’t follow their laws. We never really get to know Peter’s reason for sitting with the Jews, though, as Paul stands up to correct him. By doing this, Paul assumes he knows the heart’s intent of Peter. He also forfeits the Messiah’s teachings. By the Good News, Paul should have pulled Peter aside and talked with him one on one, but, rather than follow Biblical instruction, Paul hurt a lot of people. By saying what he said, he hurt Peter’s testimony with all the people there. He hurt his own, since he did not follow the Teaching of the Messiah in Matthew 18:15-17. And, considering more people are in conflict, and have differing views on this letter than any other, then it is safe to surmise a good many of the Galatians were confused, too. This letter, however, is probably one of the main reasons we have two very important letters from Paul’s Senior, Peter, going to the Galatians thereafter. I encourage you all to do a deep study on first and second Peter, which could be aptly named Second and Third Galatians. I feel Paul was a decent guy, but he was still a guy, and right here he made a mistake. He is human, after all. Let’s not try to make him the Messiah. Others have thought Paul a deity (Acts 14:11-20). I don’t. I tell it like it is when Jonah ran away, and I’ll do the same with Paul when he sins too. As Paul said, “We are only men!”
There is an old saying that every preacher has three sermons. It was because of that saying I vowed to not live by one or two little snippets of Scripture and call it a doctrine. It is easy to become stuck on arguing one point. Often it is because of being hounded on it all the time, that we form an agenda. What was one of Paul’s agendas? Circumcision.
Paul, earlier in this chapter said, “And I went up by revelation, and laid before them that Good News which I proclaim among the gentiles, but separately to those who were esteemed, lest somehow I run, or had run, in vain.” Peter knew that to continue sitting with gentiles would have made his message to the Jews lost. Just like Paul knew a few minutes ago. Perhaps what Peter should have done was give the message he had given in Acts 11:2-24 and showed the Jews that the gentiles could be grafted in.
Considering a few of the Jews wanted people who were not yet ready for circumcision to be circumcised, one needs to understand what this is all about. So I ask, was Adam, in Genesis, ever circumcised? The circumcised flesh looks like a heart. This picture, not shadow picture, probably has many meanings, few of which I am certain of. One thing is for certain, and that is when Yahoweh made Adam He looked and saw that all was good. Adam was created perfect, but, when he sinned, his flesh and heart became uncircumcised. They became covered in flesh, one literally, and one figuratively. This uncircumcision does not have to stay, but, in truth, circumcision is not something that can honestly happen right away. The circumcision of the heart takes a lot of time before it is subject enough to want to circumcise the flesh. Perhaps even more than, “14 years.” And even if you do become circumcised in the flesh, all glory goes to Yahoweh, our Saviour, not our self or a group of converters. If I were not circumcised already, I would choose to be. Not to be saved, and thus making Messiah of none effect to me, but because I am saved. This was almost the final step of Abraham, not the first; it took the Israelites coming out of Egypt over “40 years” to become circumcised in the heart enough to do this. Apparently, some of the believers didn’t know that.
“Now Sha’ul, perceiving that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, cried out in the council, ‘Men, brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee, I am being judged concerning the expectation and resurrection of the dead!’” (Acts 23:6).
Paul was a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee, even after he accepted the faith in Yahoshuah. What does this matter? To a Pharisee, there is not One Torah … but Two. What Torah would be a burden that the Pharisees forefathers could not bear? One of which Yahoweh said, “Don’t dare call My Torah a burden,” or the Talmud which He said to never add? The Pharisees wanted a ritual, Talmudic, conversion to the Jewish faith, and Paul said, “No!” to this ritual circumcision on many righteous grounds, as true conversion is when the heart says, “I love the Messiah enough to turn from any other, even this tiny world.” Not: “Once we have turned away, and done a set amount of works, we will be saved.”
“Now then, why do you try Elohim by putting a yoke on the neck of the taught ones which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But through the favour of the Master Yahoshuah Messiah we trust to be saved, in the same way as they.” (Acts 15:10-11). In the same way as they. But what was the yoke that our forefathers were unable to bear? What does Yahoweh say?
“‘For I earnestly warned your fathers in the day that I brought them up out of the land of Mitsrayim, until this day, rising early and warning, saying, “Obey My voice.” But they did not obey or incline their ear, but everyone walked in the stubbornness of his evil heart. So I brought on them all the words of this covenant, which I commanded them to do, and they did not do.’ And Yahoweh said to me, ‘There is a conspiracy among the men of Yehudah and among the inhabitants of Yerushalayim. They have turned back to the crookednesses of their forefathers who refused to hear My Words, and they have gone after other mighty ones to serve them. The house of Yisra’el and the house of Yehudah have broken My covenant I made with their fathers.’” (Jeremiah 11:7-10). They returned to their forefather’s made up laws, and did not obey His Torah, His Voice. Looking at this as a Berean of old would have (a Jewish congregation), we see the Galatians were turning away from the Torah by returning to the customs of their forefathers, who were not believers, but unbelievers. It is saddening how a letter that was crying out to them to return to the walk of Messiah, has been used for many generations to fall into Lawlessness, robbing us of all.
“And place their trust in Elohim, and not forget the works of El, but watch over His commands, and not be like their fathers, a stubborn and rebellious generation, a generation which did not prepare its heart, whose spirit was not steadfast to El.” (Psalms 78:7-8).
Paul was angry that Peter had possibly slipped briefly and followed their law instead of the Law of Love. Often when people are angry they are mad at others doing what they have done or do. Perhaps Peter should have done something different in this situation, but it is clear from the teachings of the Messiah that so should have Paul. Many of us sometimes get angry at certain sins of the past, and are not very good at presenting the truth because we are still too mad to just be mad at the sin, but completely in love with the people.
“For though I am free from all, I made myself a servant to all, in order to win more, and to the Yehudim I became as a Yehudite, that I might win Yehudim; to those who are under Torah, as under Torah, so as to win those who are under Torah; to those without Torah, as without Torah—not being without Torah toward Elohim, but under Torah of Messiah—so as to win those who are without Torah. To the weak I became as weak, so as to win the weak. To all men I have become all, so as to save some, by all means.” (1 Corinthians 9:19-22). I am who I am in the Messiah. I will not become vulgar with those who are vulgar to win more converts. If I were to do that, they would win a convert and the Kingdom of Heaven would win nothing. To those without Torah, Paul still had Torah, he just became weaker as they were weak, or spoke in a simple language, to win converts. He isn’t saying we should sin to win a sinner, but rather that we should understand their perspective, to walk a mile, even two, in their shoes.
Compare to 1 Corinthians 9:19-22 to this: “For all His right-rulings are before me; as for His laws, I do not turn from them. And I am perfect before Him, and I guard myself from my crookedness. And Yahoweh repays me according to my righteousness, according to my cleanness before His eyes. With the kind You show Yourself kind, with the perfect one You show Yourself perfect, with the clean You show Yourself clean, and with the crooked You show Yourself twisted. For You save the humble people, but Your eyes are on the haughty to bring them low. For You are my lamp, O Yahoweh, and Yahoweh makes my darkness light.” (2 Samuel 22:23-29).
“Do not rebuke an older man, but appeal to him as a father, younger ones as brothers, elderly women as mothers, younger ones as sisters, in all cleanliness.” (1 Timothy 5:1-2). Oh, what a blessing this would have been had Paul said, “I pulled Peter aside, and found out what was wrong. Once he told me, I corrected him with Scripture on the spot. Peter saw the error of his way and quickly repented. He then addressed the crowds, and told them all about the Good News, about how those who are far in the race ought remember they were once newborns in the faith as well. He made all laugh with merriment, saying that we should not challenge a baby to run, but to run ourselves so the newborns will always see Messiah in us: full of mercy and longsuffering for the sake of the lost.”
Not wanting you to be ignorant of my emotion when writing this: I am not feeling haughty or arrogant when considering these things. I am fully aware of my own shortcomings, and recall many. I, like Paul, have spoken harshly when I ought to have pulled the one person aside. I, too, am just a man.
Paul here claims Peter lived as a gentile. The accusation does not fit. Peter did not live like a gentile. Peter had never given into the circumcision group before; in fact, he was the first to stand up to them concerning gentile believers, so why would he be afraid of them now? Also, Barnabas was a Levite, and had been following and ministering for some time, and was himself looked up to; it seems strange that he would be “led astray” so easily.
There is a gem hidden in Paul’s refutation, though. Peter, who unlike Paul was one of the pillars of the assembly (church), was compelling gentiles to behave as Jews and nothing was seen as wrong with that. Peter just was not behaving as a Jew at the time … because his actions were showing human inequality, and that is, of course, if the report given is true. In the same manner, you cannot say to your child, “Darn it boy you need to stop saying, ‘darn it!’” You cannot say, “Keep the Torah.” while abandoning the Word Who became flesh.
(It seems to be, within the context we have, that Paul’s reply was immediate, as he made no mention of pulling Peter aside, but rather seemed quick to anger. It is possible that Paul may have pulled Peter aside, thereby adhering to Biblical doctrine, however, this is highly unlikely due to attitude, time restraints, and no mention of it whatsoever.
It does not fit with Peter’s character to be a hypocrite. He fled with the others at the Messiah’s death, but from the time he was asked, “Peter … do you love me?” Peter has been a fine example and follower of Yahoweh unlike any other. Something does not fit, and, due to Paul’s outburst, we never get to see an examining or an account of two or three witnesses. It is possible I am wrong in my view of this, but sadly, we will never fully know until we are given audience with a pillar of the church, and also with Paul.
Perhaps Paul did right in stating the Good News openly, but I dare say that bashing the darkness is a fickle activity, while proclaiming the Light will banish all darkness.)
Note: From James, does not mean James actually sent. See Acts 1:6-8, 10:28, 15:1, 15:5, and 15:24.
Note: This has nothing to do with clean and unclean meat as I have heard reports of some actually believing. That is utterly absurd. To be honest, at first I wouldn’t believe it, until I met some who did, and read commentaries that profess it. No words imply that this had to do with the eating of unclean meat at all. Peter, need I remind you, refused to eat any kind of animal, clean or unclean, in the vision in Acts, and Paul said he’d never eat meat again so as to not lose a testimony.
It’s not that gentiles were eating shellfish covered pork slop, ‘cause if they were, we’d read about a fight, and they would have been kicked out of the synagogue. No. The reason Jews were not to eat with gentiles was because of their man made legal system. The gentile may not have tithed from his harvest. The gentile certainly hadn’t followed the pharisaic traditions of baptizing pots or other man made laws some sects of Judaism had made up. The Jews, remember, tithed their spices, and the Messiah thought it well to do so, but Paul said to eat whatever is set before you. Which does not mean you should say, “Bon appetite.” when visiting a cannibal tribe, nor should you say, “Mm, yummy.” and eat eye of newt and spiders when visiting a witch. No, rather, may the food provided, if it is food, be a gift unto Yahoweh by using the energy it gives to share the gift of hope, whether it had been tithed from or not.
Why were they called “of the circumcision?” It is the reported reason as to why Peter went over there. To make this text read that he went over to the circumcised because of clean and unclean issues is as faulty as saying Peter did so based on clothing issues, or because they had thicker beards. Also, this was the assembly. I assure you they weren’t sitting there writhing in disobedience by eating pig flesh in the synagogue.
Let’s stick to what is really being said here. It was a pharisaic law that Jews and gentiles were not to be around each other let alone eat at the same table. Acts 10:27-29. Law or no law, I would have done the same thing Peter did. If my brothers come into a room, I will go greet them. If I had a choice, to hang around gentiles or Jews, I would choose Jews. Why? Not because of food, clean laws, circumcision, or tithe issues. There are over 613 reasons why I would go sit with the Jews, including the fact the message is to go to them first. Jews will often sit and consider Job’s life, and will discuss how to be as loving to the Creator as he was. Gentiles will often talk about Job 9:5, err, their 9-5 job, and about how it affords them dirt bikes and football. Which conversation would you prefer? The answer shows whom your King, or king, really is.
Dietary laws are not mentioned. The idea of this being about food is based solely on the agenda of those who attempt to mock Yahoweh and His Word by saying His Torah is done away with while their theology lives on. A fool’s mission.
Paul goofed. Peter may have. Just like us, Paul is just a human. Dead animals were not being eaten. Moving on.
“We, Yahudim by nature, and not of the gentiles, sinners, knowing that a man is not declared right by works of Torah, but through belief in Yahoshuah Messiah, even we have believed in Messiah Yahoshuah, in order to be declared right by belief in Messiah and not by works of Torah, because by works of Torah no flesh shall be declared right.” (2:15-16).
This is where many go off the deep end. Paul is obviously talking about far more than belief here. He didn’t mean we could kill each other. Nor did he mean that if you don’t kill anyone you have merited eternal life. Both, no matter what commandment is used, applies here. Yet, note the beginning of this, “We, Jews by nature, and not of the gentiles, sinners”. Sin? What is sin? “Everyone doing sin also does lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.” (1 John 3:4).
Many have altered this passage to read in their hearts—not words—that, “If you have abandoned the law like us gentiles, then why do anything the Jews do?” However, Paul identifies the gentiles as sinners. Therefore, “living after the manner of gentiles,” is not what Paul advocates, but rather we are not to be sinners like gentiles. What does that leave us with?
“We’re free from walking like the Messiah!” says the modern Christian. Okay, they usually say, “We’re free from the Law!” but that is what they mean. They mean never to walk like the Messiah because they “don’t have to.” While I am sure there are such people, I have yet to meet a person who loves His Name so much they call Him by Name, and honor His Sabbath, say, “We’re free from walking like the Messiah!” but those who make their own “god” are plagued by this decision. The plague of assuming there is no reason to walk as Yahoshuah walked. Their children fall to their death because they haven’t even the hem of the garment of He Who saves to hang onto.
“For not the hearers of the Torah are righteous in the sight of Elohim, but the doers of the law shall be declared right.” (Romans 2:13).
“You see, then, that a man is declared right by works, and not by belief alone.” (James 2:24).
If the Law is to lead us to the Messiah, then perhaps this is why some Christians do not know Him. Without leading, the sheep wander, and without His voice (His very Word / Torah), we have no idea if what we are doing is of Yah or not of Yah. True: We are not saved by doing Torah. Also true: We are not saved by belief so feeble is revels in disobedience. A double-edged sword many single-edge minded people simply don’t want to understand.
Please read Deuteronomy 30:1-4, 2 Chronicles 6:36-39, and John 10:16.
“And if, while seeking to be declared right by Messiah, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Messiah then a servant of sin? Let it not be! For if I rebuild what I once overthrew, I establish myself a transgressor. For through Torah I died to Torah, in order to live to Elohim. I have been impaled with Messiah, and I no longer live, but Messiah lives in me. And that which I now live in the flesh I live by belief in the Son of Elohim, Who loved me and gave Himself for me. I do not set aside the favour of Elohim, for if righteousness is through Torah, then Messiah died for naught.” (2:17-21).
Continue to bear in mind the last section of Paul’s letter, as well as the last portion of commentary. Paul goes right into this, saying the Messiah is no servant of sin. And I dare say if He is no servant of sin, then his followers ought not be as well. Don’t ever let the false teachers of today cause you to forget 1 John 3:4. Then Paul tells us he overthrew something. But what? He overthrew many things, such as the Pharisee’s teachings and a murderers heart, and if he went back to any of those things then he certainly would be a transgressor, a breaker of Yahoweh’s Torah.
Torah. … As we all well know, Torah means teachings. Ah, but whose teachings? Satan’s? Paul certainly lived by those for a while, didn’t he? Or perhaps the law of traditions, the Romans, the Pharisee’s, the Talmud’s, the Pagan’s, the Almighty’s. Who knows? Well, we do. Look at the context. Could Paul be living for Elohim had he completely disregarded the commandments of Elohim? No! Through the True Torah all the false torah died! Take that, evil teachings. “What, then, shall we say? Is the Torah sin? Let it not be! However, I did not know sin except through the Torah. For also the covetousness I knew not if the Torah had not said, ‘You shall not covet.’” (Romans 7:7). “So that the Torah truly is set-apart, and the command set-apart, and righteous, and good.” (Romans 7:12).
The requirement of the Law demands our death. We fulfill this when we die unto Yahoshuah so that the Messiah may live in us. Thus, it is I who is dead to the Law, not the Law being dead unto me, for how can it be if it is no longer I who live, but the Messiah. If Paul no longer lives, then he would be like the Messiah. A fervent Torah keeping Jew who would encourage people to let go of the traditions of men and walk in the path of righteousness, not in human inequality as Peter may have done for a short time, and which Paul himself is also guilty. I fear too many people take this passage to mean Paul is claiming to be the Pope, allegedly the voice of the Almighty on earth, by claiming it is no longer he who lives, but Messiah. Paul is still human. He just yearns so much to serve the Saviour that it doesn’t matter to him what his wants are. You know, wants like food and a nice bed, or for that matter: life.
The Messiah did not die for not, because we have all sinned. You would have to work really hard to make this passage say anything else. Righteousness is not solely by means of keeping Torah, because we can’t keep it fully, much like I cannot perfectly love my wife. That doesn’t mean at all that we should go on sinning, just that we should put our Faith in the Messiah for our Righteousness, Salvation, and Hope.
If Paul said to abandon Torah, then he taught a different Good News than the Messiah did, and to Hades with Paul’s doctrine. If he ever does, then I will bravely say it, but so far he hasn’t. He goofs up a little here and there, and his wording is a little weird, but name one man who hasn’t goofed?
Please read 2 Corinthians 6:16 and 13:5.
“He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them concerning these things. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also the other writings. You, therefore, beloved ones, being forewarned, guard yourselves, lest you are led away by the errors of lawless men and fall from your secure position,” (2 Peter 3:16-17).
Okay, this isn’t Galatians, but it was written to the Galatians, and thus is just as much Galatians as anything else. However, no one thinks this is talking about them. “Ignorant and unstable! That can’t be me.” (Be sure to stretch out the e on that me.) But it has to be someone, doesn’t it? Look back on your past. Look back ten, twenty, thirty years, depending on how old you are, obviously, as you can’t look back thirty years if you’re only twenty. Were you smart back when you were five, ten, or twenty? Almost every one says no. Why? Because you’re smarter now than you were even just a few years ago. That doesn’t mean you were overtly dumb back then, just not as learned as you are now. One may even be able to say you were ignorant of a few things. And it would not be unlikely to say that in a few more years you will look back and consider your old self, unstable. In fact, you may even come to the realization that to attempt to say Paul set aside, or told us to set aside, a single commandment, thus being lawless, means we are willfully calling ourselves ignorant and unstable!
While it is important to read all of Scripture in context, it is especially important to read the letter to the Galatians in context. Many Christian leaders believe that Galatians contradicts what Yahoweh wrote though Moses—what was taught by the Messiah. They accept this contradiction and call it, “progressive revelation.” Basically, progressive revelation attempts to show one part of the Bible can supercede or do away with what was written or said in another part of the Bible. Yet, is that really needed? The Israelites wanted to break the Torah—all humans do. Therefore, there would be no need for a progressive revelation of disobedience since we have wanted to be sinners from the start. Did the Messiah do away with the commandment against adultery? Or did He tell us to not even look at a woman lustfully? Should we believe an interpretation of Paul over the Messiah, thinking that Paul had the greater revelation of the mystery of the gospel? Lunacy! What does the letter to the Galatians, 2 Peter 3:16-17, tell us concerning this? What does the Holy Spirit? … As for me and my house: we will serve Yahoweh!
Okay, back to Galatians, and on to the next chapter! The main chapter everyone tells you to read.
Be Blessed and be a Blessing
Shalom
-Valentine Thalken Billingsley
If this blessed you, please share it.
Additional Scripture References:
Genesis to Revelations