Down an Unfamiliar Road

A FEW KIND WORDS CAN HAVE A BIG IMPACT

This story was originally posted on the Gimundo.com website. It was then suggested to Truth Book by Linda Sepp. After having read David Wilkerson’s “The Cross and the Switchblade,” I am persuaded that something like this can happen.

When Julio Diaz stepped off the New York City subway platform after work one night, he was simply planning to walk over to his favorite local diner for a meal. But when a teenage boy approached him with a knife blade gleaming in his fist, Diaz, a 31-year-old social worker, knew the evening was about to take a more dramatic turn.

The young man demanded Diaz’s wallet, and Diaz handed it over without objection. But just as his young mugger turned to walk away, Diaz called after him: “Hey, wait a minute. You forgot something.”

The mugger turned around, surprised. “If you’re going to be robbing people for the rest of the night, you might as well take my coat to keep you warm.”

The teenager looked at Diaz in disbelief and asked why he would do such a thing. Diaz replied, “If you’re willing to risk your freedom for ten to fifteen years for a few dollars, then I guess you must really need the money.” He told the young man that he’d just been heading out for dinner and that he would be happy for some company.

Diaz told the surprised NPR StoryCorps reporter, “You know, I just felt maybe he really need help more than the money.” Diaz told NPR’s StoryCorps. What did the boy do, asked the reporter? He decided to take me up on my offer, and they headed into Diaz’s favorite local hangout together. As they were sitting at the table, the manager, the dishwashers, and the waiters all came over to say hello to Diaz, and the young man was amazed at Diaz’s popularity. “You’re even nice to the dishwasher,” the boy exclaimed!

“Weren’t you taught that you should be nice to everybody?” Diaz asked him. “Yea, but I didn’t think people actually behaved that way,” the teenager replied. Thanks to Diaz, he was beginning to see that kindness wasn’t such a strange phenomenon, after all.

When the bill came, Diaz told the teen that he’d have to get the check. After all, he still had Diaz’s wallet. But the teenager slid the wallet back across the table without a moment’s thought, and Diaz treated him to dinner. Diaz also gave the would-be mugger a $20 bill to take with him – in exchange for the young man’s knife. “I figured, said Diaz, if you treat people right, you can only hope that they treat you right. “It’s a very simple thing to do in this complicated world.”

After watching the news every night and seeing multiple reports of muggers and purse-snatchers commit their heartless and senseless crimes, if there were such a young man out there who really was looking for acceptance and kindness, they must be far and few between. But there’s always that one in a million chance there may be one. So, we must decide whether it’s worth taking the risk, as we hand over our wallet and cell phone, etc., to ask a would-be mugger if they know there are Christians in this world that would love to help them and keep them out of jail. Jesus did it for the thief on the cross, maybe if we’re confronted, we can do what Jesus did.

But it doesn’t have to be a knife-wielding mugger or some petty thief, there are those who are acting out of desperation and need. And there is no greater need in this world than the need to know Jesus and have Him in your life. So when we see someone who seems to have lost all hope of gaining a better life and get out of poverty or improve their situation, they too need someone to tell them as Christians they are not only interested in their own prosperity, but to fulfill the Scriptures in helping those with spiritual needs as well as material needs. Just a hand on their shoulder and hearing the words, “Did you know that Jesus loves you?” may be the thing that changes their lives. There’s no need in going out and searching for such persons, the Holy Spirit will bring them across your path. If the Holy Spirit is not ready to deal with them yet, then neither should you.  – Dr. Robert R Seyda

A FEW KIND WORDS CAN HAVE A BIG IMPACT

This story was originally posted on the Gimundo.com website. It was then suggested to Truth Book by Linda Sepp. After having read David Wilkerson’s “The Cross and the Switchblade,” I am persuaded that something like this can happen.

When Julio Diaz stepped off the New York City subway platform after work one night, he was simply planning to walk over to his favorite local diner for a meal. But when a teenage boy approached him with a knife blade gleaming in his fist, Diaz, a 31-year-old social worker, knew the evening was about to take a more dramatic turn.

The young man demanded Diaz’s wallet, and Diaz handed it over without objection. But just as his young mugger turned to walk away, Diaz called after him: “Hey, wait a minute. You forgot something.” The mugger turned around, surprised. “If you’re going to be robbing people for the rest of the night, you might as well take my coat to keep you warm.”

The teenager looked at Diaz in disbelief and asked why he would do such a thing. Diaz replied, “If you’re willing to risk your freedom for ten to fifteen years for a few dollars, then I guess you must really need the money.” He told the young man that he’d just been heading out for dinner and that he would be happy for some company.

Diaz told the surprised NPR StoryCorps reporter, “You know, I just felt maybe he really need help more than the money.” Diaz told NPR’s StoryCorps. What did the boy do, asked the reporter? He decided to take me up on my offer, and they headed into Diaz’s favorite local hangout together. As they were sitting at the table, the manager, the dishwashers, and the waiters all came over to say hello to Diaz, and the young man was amazed at Diaz’s popularity. “You’re even nice to the dishwasher,” the boy exclaimed!

“Weren’t you taught that you should be nice to everybody?” Diaz asked him. “Yea, but I didn’t think people actually behaved that way,” the teenager replied. Thanks to Diaz, he was beginning to see that kindness wasn’t such a strange phenomenon, after all.

When the bill came, Diaz told the teen that he’d have to get the check. After all, he still had Diaz’s wallet. But the teenager slid the wallet back across the table without a moment’s thought, and Diaz treated him to dinner. Diaz also gave the would-be mugger a $20 bill to take with him – in exchange for the young man’s knife. “I figured, said Diaz, if you treat people right, you can only hope that they treat you right. “It’s a very simple thing to do in this complicated world.”

After watching the news every night and seeing multiple reports of muggers and purse-snatchers commit their heartless and senseless crimes, if there were such a young man out there who really was looking for acceptance and kindness, they must be far and few between. But there’s always that one in a million chance there may be one. So, we must decide whether it’s worth taking the risk, as we hand over our wallet and cell phone, etc., to ask a would-be mugger if they know there are Christians in this world that would love to help them and keep them out of jail. Jesus did it for the thief on the cross, maybe if we’re confronted, we can do what Jesus did.

But it doesn’t have to be a knife-wielding mugger or some petty thief, there are those who are acting out of desperation and need. And there is no greater need in this world than the need to know Jesus and have Him in your life. So when we see someone who seems to have lost all hope of gaining a better life and get out of poverty or improve their situation, they too need someone to tell them as Christians they are not only interested in their own prosperity, but to fulfill the Scriptures in helping those with spiritual needs as well as material needs. Just a hand on their shoulder and hearing the words, “Did you know that Jesus loves you?” may be the thing that changes their lives. There’s no need in going out and searching for such persons, the Holy Spirit will bring them across your path. If the Holy Spirit is not ready to deal with them yet, then neither should you.  – Dr. Robert R Seyda

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CONGREGATIONS OF BELIEVERS

CHAPTER TWO (Lesson X)

John Edmunds (1800-1874) who noted earlier that Paul was telling this story about his encounter with the Judaizers in Jerusalem with the ulterior motive of teaching the Galatians on how to deal with the Judaizers who came to them with the same argument. So, when Paul gets to the point here in verse five where he describes how he dealt with the opposition. He uses the same ulterior motive they did to teach the Galatians on how to handle any arguments the Judaizers might start in trying to persuade them to go all the way back into the teachings of Judaism as a supplement or attachment to their salvation by grace through Jesus the Anointed One.

So, Edmunds says that the Galatians are hearing Paul say, more or less, we gave in on all the points where we could find common ground, but when it came to their demand that Titus must undergo circumcision, we drew a line and would not go past that line. But Paul qualifies their actions by saying that they didn’t do it out of spite or to make the Judaizers mad, that’s a coward’s way of doing things. They did it as taking a stance to defend the privileges that were to be extended to all Gentiles who became followers of Jesus, and the only way to do that was to preach a consistent, unadulterated, Gospel message without fail.[1]

Johann Lange (1802-1884) believes that Paul’s fear of having “run in vain,” came from the fact that he proved unwilling to agree that all he taught the Gentiles was about the elimination of Jewish Law, rites, rituals, and ceremonies from having any impact on their salvation. To do that, then all he did might rightfully be considered as nothing more than a waste of time. His preaching would have been labeled as false. Not only would his credibility be ruined, but the Galatians’ faith in his teaching would also be lost.[2] Like a marathon runner who comes to what he believes is the Finish Line, only to find out he ran the wrong course. Hence, there is no medal to be given him for his efforts. In other words, all of his runnings was in vain.

William O’Conor (1820-1887) sees Paul’s insistence on the purity and perfectness of the doctrine which he originally communicated to his converts in Galatia might be rendered more difficult to defend if he couldn’t tell them that the Apostles examined and approved it. There’d be nothing left but his word against that of the Judaizers. It was Paul’s way of saying to them, “I took the step I described, in order that I may now be able to say that I did so to establish that the Gospel which I preached to you as being genuine.”[3]

Alvah Hovey (1820-1903) suggests that in addition to understanding what Paul was saying about these individuals sneaking into the meeting and then rising to disrupt the discussion with their accusations of Paul’s misleading teachings to the Gentiles about Jewish Law, rites, and rituals, that we consider another view. It could also be that these brethren joined the discussion because they were known to the others, but somehow, they were able to “secretly introduce” their objections. This might have been planned to catch everyone off guard so that their defenses were not already in place. It is that Paul discerned that these were false brethren. Hovey says that it is difficult to decide between this and the preceding interpretation. Either of them is consistent with the language and the situation, but neither of them is obvious. Scholars thus far labored in vain to reach a perfectly satisfactory interpretation of it. So that means either one will do. In fact, they both may be right.[4]

George Whitefield Clark (1831-1911) English Anglican cleric and evangelist who was one of the founders of Methodism and the evangelical movement, finds in verse five that Paul gives us the first glimpse of the freedom of grace which he supports and the bondage of works he opposes. Obligation to the Law as a means of salvation based on justification was nothing short of slavery. Freedom is found only in union with the Anointed One and consequent service to Him out of grateful love. There are works, but they are works of love, not forced labor. Paul was very much opposed to the Pharisaic form of bondage they were trying to trick the Gentile Galatians into accepting. He knew that once they yielded, it would become almost impossible to break free again. So, by taking a stand against this teaching, Paul was able to secure an immortal victory on behalf of the Gentile world. We are thankful to the Apostle to this day.[5]

In fact, one of the theologians that Clark uses in his commentary as a resource, written by George Barker Stevens (1854-1906) American Congregational and Presbyterian clergyman, theologian, author, educator, and Yale Divinity School professor, says that the Galatian Christians, being predominately Gentile, would be included as a priority in maintaining the principle of freedom from the Law. One cannot overestimate the importance of the Apostle Paul’s position on this issue. Stevens states that “He was a great champion of the independence, completeness, and sufficiency of Christianity.” He made it clear that justification by grace and salvation by faith should not, and must not, be mixed with legality or obligation to man-made rules.[6]

Ernest DeWitt Burton (1856-1925) notices what may be called the spark that set off the fiery debate that resulted from this uninvited interruption of the proceedings before the Apostles and council. It’s Paul’s words that “not even Titus, who was with him and who was a Gentile, was compelled to be circumcised.” That’s when the fireworks went off. It wasn’t that Paul wanted to make a big show out of his stance on the non-necessity of circumcision for the Gentiles, but to present Titus, obviously a very talented young man since he ended up being a bishop,[7] as an example of a dedicated servant of the Anointed One. So, if God was willing to accept him as one of His children, certainly the Apostles could not object to his being counted among all believers as genuine, even among the Jewish believers. Could it be that some of these interrupters were among those Judaizers that were now causing havoc in Galatia?[8]

Cyril Emmet in his comments on those who were soon to be proven as “false brethren” got into the meeting so they could interrupt the proceedings highlights the fact that they were “privately brought in” through the back door. Paul Kretzmann says, “smuggled themselves in.”[9] And Duncan Hester suggests that there were Judaizers already embedded in the Jerusalem congregation purposefully to disrupt the proceedings.[10] The Greek adjective pareisaktos that Paul uses here either means, “secretly or surreptitiously brought in,” or “one who was stolen in.” So, if we accept the idea that Paul is relating an incident that happened earlier back in Galatia, then perhaps those who tried and failed there, relayed the information to their comrades in Jerusalem to try it again.

In either case, they were not invited. They got in with someone’s help. That means that some individual who was already in the meeting because they were recognized as part of the group, worked in cooperation with these scoundrels to sneak them in without anyone noticing or seeing. No doubt after they interrupted the meeting with their questions, it didn’t take Paul long to recognize that their sole purpose was to discredit the believer’s freedom in the Anointed One so that they might bring them back into bondage to the Law. What was Paul’s response? He said, “not for a minute did we give in to them.”[11]

One Messianic writer makes an interesting point on the fact that Paul was under pressure to force Titus’ circumcision. He notes that the Greek verb anagkazō used here means to necessitate, compel, drive to, by force, threats, etc. It suggests that even Titus, a Gentile believer, did not want to be circumcised and Paul respected his decision. Ronald Fung notes that he and others feel that it would seem preferable, to take what Paul says here as referring to an event which took place not at this Jerusalem meeting but on a subsequent occasion – as we gather, at Antioch[12] – and of which Paul is reminded by his mention of Titus and circumcision.[13]

Messianic Rabbi Avi ben Mordechai shares several thoughts on what Paul meant by “truth of the Gospel.” He believes the word “truth” used here is a reference to Hebrew Scriptures where “truth” is defined as the teaching of Mosaic Law.[14] Of course, says Mordechai, here it is implying that the “truth” in his Gospel is derived from the Torah and the Prophets.[15] This is all confirmed by Yeshua in His statement that God sent Him to the Jews who were lost in their sins.[16] As Mordechai sees it, by combining the truth in the Torah, Prophets, and Wisdom Writings, along with the enhanced teachings of Yeshua, was a way of combining believing Jews and Gentiles into one flock under one Shepherd to do what God instructed His people to do starting with Moses and finishing with the Messiah.[17] This is what the forefathers were promised in a blood oath taken at Mount Horeb in Sinai.[18] [19]

Since it is a clear command of Torah, why wouldn’t Paul and Titus want to exercise that in order to become a seasoned member of the community, accepted by Jews and Gentiles alike? Paul was surely aware of the prevailing rabbinic teaching that Gentiles were not considered covenant members until after conversion and circumcision. Thus, his motives for accepting or refusing circumcision at that time were a reflection of his taking a stand with Paul to send the right signal to the newly formed Gentile faction within Apostolic Judaism. If the pressure wasn’t put on him, there’s every reason to believe that Titus might be more amenable to the idea. As long as Paul was satisfied with it, Titus felt no need to bow to the pressure.

[1] John Edmunds: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p.31

[2] Lange’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Galatians, Vol. 8, loc. cit.

[3] O’Conor, W. A On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 22

[4] Hovey, A: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 27.

[5] George Whitefield Clark: On Galatians, op. cit., p. 68

[6] George B. Stevens: Commentary on Galatians, op. cit., pp. 61-62

[7] See Titus 1:4

[8] Ernest DeWitt Burton: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 75

[9] Paul A. Kretzmann: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit.

[10] Duncan Hester: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit.,

[11] Cyril Emmet: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 15

[12] Acts of the Apostles 15:1, 24

[13] Ronald Y. K. Fung: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 91

[14] Psalms 119:142, 151, 160; Malachi 2:6; Daniel 9:13

[15] See Deuteronomy 30:1-4; Isaiah 11:12; Jeremiah31:10; Ezekiel 37:21-23; Amos 9:11; Hosea 1:10-11; Micah 2:12.

[16] Matthew 15:24; Acts of the Apostles 1:6-8

[17] Ezekiel 11:19-20, 36;27; John 16:11

[18] Exodus 24:3-8

[19] Avi ben Mordechai: On Galatians, op. cit., p. 15

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CONGREGATIONS OF BELIEVERS

CHAPTER TWO (Lesson IX)

In another place, Calvin notes that there is nothing plainer than this rule: we are to use our liberty if it tends to the edification of our neighbor, but if it puts our neighbor in an uneasy position, we are to abstain from it. There are some, says Calvin, who pretend to utilize this discretion that Paul advises, by not using their liberty at all, especially when they utilize it to refrain from being charitable to their neighbor in giving them things because they may be embarrassed by being treated in that fashion. So sometimes, they don’t want the word liberty used when it comes to doing, or not doing, something with their neighbor’s interest in mind. They want to use their liberty for their own good and edification rather than to modify it occasionally just to make themselves look good. It is part of every dedicated believer’s thinking that the proper use of the free power given to them in such external, not eternal, things as charitable giving will qualify them, even more, to deal with such issues.[1]

Jakob Arminius comments on the situation of Titus, one of Paul’s most prominent Gentile converts, who was being used by Jewish converts to attack Paul for not instructing Titus to be circumcised in order to satisfy their interpretation of the Law and the Gospel. Arminius feels that they either forgot or weren’t convinced that the ceremonial law was abolished by the cross, the death, and the resurrection of the Anointed One. That by His ascension into heaven and the mission for which the Holy Spirit was sent to bring the truth out of the shadows, and by His human body the Anointed One was able to fulfill the Law’s demand for circumcision,[2] and be the completion of all the types represented in Jewish sacrifices, ceremonies, rites, rituals, and feasts.[3]

However, no matter what the Anointed One did, we must also acknowledge that the Law is no longer given our allegiance and obedience. And the moment we unchained ourselves from its rule, every obligatory right it exercised over us was once and for all severed from it. In that same instant, it ceased to live in our hearts and minds because it was dead to us.[4] Afterward, it was actually to be abolished as having any part of our salvation. This came about partly by the teaching of the Apostles among believers who by degrees understood “the Anointed One to be the end of the law.” And since we no longer have any relationship with the Law, we voluntarily rejected any use of that law to enhance our salvation.

Its abolition was also accomplished in part, by the power of God in the destruction of Jerusalem and of the temple which was the seat of Jewish religion, and the place appointed for performing those religious observances, against the disobedience of the unbelieving Jews. From this period on the legal ceremonies began to be pointless for Jews and Christians, although in the intermediate time that elapsed between the ascension of the Anointed One and the destruction of Jerusalem, these rites, even in the judgment of the Apostles themselves, were tolerated only among the Jews, and with a provision, that they should not be imposed on the Gentiles.[5] But for some Messianic Jews, such toleration allowed them to consider their interpretation as being tantamount to launching a new institution.[6]

When commenting on what Paul says about how some of the Messianic Jews in the congregation Council in Jerusalem were wanting to bring the Gentiles under the same rules and regulations that they lived by in compliance with Jewish Ceremonial Law, John Bunyan thought it was important that they maintain unity in the congregation, especially on what is being preached and taught. I’m quite sure that Bunyan seemed puzzled as to why the disciples took so much time and discussion in choosing the successor to the disgraced Judas Iscariot as part of the twelve [7] but then didn’t seem to follow the same protocol in choosing members of the Jerusalem Council.

Bunyan believes that only those with the courage to live and rule by the approved design to promote unity and peace in the congregations should be the ones chosen. They must also possess the wisdom needed to deal with issues that arise, and the courage to correct those who get out of line, but to do so with humility. Yes, there will be times when some must be rebuked sharply, but not as a punishment. It must be done to help them become more mature in the faith. That’s why Paul tells the Galatians here in verse five that when he saw those on the Council trying to implement rules and mandatory compliance of Jewish Ceremonial Laws into his Gospel to the Gentiles, he resisted them without hesitation. So it must be with believers who find some who want to interject into their faith and beliefs rules and mandatory elements that are not found in the Gospel, they too must resist with all their might.[8]

But Bunyan also found a connection between his advice for those who suffer for the Lord Jesus the Anointed One, and are ridiculed or persecuted because of their right standing with God and His Word, and what Paul faced in Jerusalem before the divided congregation’s Council. First of all, Bunyan concludes that Paul and his fellow workers were encountering opposition because of doing what was right in exempting Gentile believers from having to comply with Jewish Ceremonial Law.  Added to that, was the fact that Paul and his fellow missionaries felt that the Gentiles deserved to be treated as equal believers along with the Jews without conforming to Ceremonial Laws, rites, and rituals. Then they must agree that both Jews and Gentiles were sinners in the eyes of God and both needed to be redeemed, forgiven, chosen, and saved by the same grace of God. So anything that was added to that was not of God but of man.

It was also important to note that Gentile converts were living outside Judea so why should they be made to abide by customs and manners that were not known to them. As long as God knew them, that was the most important. And Paul’s other point was that since they were being ridiculed for doing what was right, that criticism did not diminish their standing with God. Both they and the Jewish converts stood equal before God. Also, Bunyan believed that the Gentiles would remain pure and holy before God even if they did suffer for refusing to abide by Jewish Ceremonial Law in order to get the approval of Jews or the ungodly. Not only that, but the Gentiles must never let their suffering for doing right go to their heads and think that made them better than other believers. In fact, they will manage their sufferings with graceful words and actions that will be long remembered after they are gone to their rest in the Lord.

Bunyan believes that is why Paul asked the Colossians to join him and rejoice in his sufferings for the name of the Anointed One.[9] That’s because by his suffering others were made stronger in the Lord. Paul phrased it this way to the Philippians, “Even if I give my life as a gift on the altar to God for you, I am glad and share this joy with you.”[10] But why was Paul rejoicing and asking others to rejoice with him in this? Why? Because as a result of his sufferings that caused him much stress and was taxing on his body, yet it was for the refreshing, comfort, and stability of others. That way at the end of the letter, Paul would tell the Galatians that he considered these things as marks that helped identify him with Jesus the Anointed One who suffered for everyone. But at this point in the letter, he sees that what he and Titus were going through in Jerusalem was nothing more than a little pushing and shoving against the Synagogue Jews. The best he could hope for might be a few bruises here and there.[11]

I like the way German scholar Johann Bengel defines the truths of the Gospel.[12] When it comes to truth, “Truth is unyielding and firm – it abandons nothing that belongs to it and admits nothing foreign to it.[13]”[14] And James Haldane says that the greatness of the Gospel is found in its genuineness and simplicity.[15] And Catholic scholar George Haydock states that by the approval of a living assembly or council, which everyone should be willing to seek for advice, the Scriptures are not made true, altered or amended; they are to declare that God’s Word is infallible, not man’s.[16]

Revivalist Adam Clarke gives his view of what was going on here.  He surmises that the Judaizers were allowed to be introduced into the assembly of the Apostles as legitimate members of the Christian community. Their true intent, however, was to oppose Paul and his associates in their preaching the Anointed One to the Gentiles, and admitting them into the congregation without obliging them to observe circumcision and keep the law. Once the Apostle Paul recognized that such individuals were in the assembly, he thought it better not to mention his mission among the Gentiles at that time, lest, by means of those false brethren, the meeting might deteriorate into altercations and disputes. That’s why he first met with the Apostles in a private conference, to set the whole matter straight, relative to his work among the Gentiles. That when it did come before the conference, they gave him their support.

Clarke goes on to say that this gave Paul such satisfaction with his Divine call and that in preaching among the Gentiles he acted in strict conformity to it, that he did not submit in the least to the opinion of those Judaizing teachers. Therefore, he continued to insist on the exemption of the Gentiles from the necessity of submitting to Jewish rites; that the truth of the Gospel – this grand doctrine, that the Gentiles are admitted by the Gospel of the Anointed One to be fellow-heirs with the Jews, might continue. Because of that, this same doctrine continues until this day.[17]

The one trait that is found in those who are stubborn advocates of the truth as they see it, and insist on following the narrow line as drawn by their imagination, is that they are committed to it day and night, come what may. It is like they are staring straight ahead like a horse with blinders and with earplugs so as not to be distracted by the truth. No matter how you try to introduce them to an alternate way of seeing things by showing them that even the Scriptures do not fully support their beliefs, they still refuse to listen. Even worse, they begin to think of anyone who wanted to help them see a different way that was supported by Scriptures as an enemy of their souls. Only the Holy Spirit is qualified to complete this task, so it’s best to trust Him.

[1] Ibid. Institutes, op. cit., Prefatory Address to Francis, King of France, Bk. 3, Ch. 19, p. 873

[2] Colossians 2:11-12

[3] Hebrews 8:1-6

[4] Galatians 4:9, 10; 1 Corinthians 7:19; 9:19, 20; 2 Corinthians 3:13-16

[5] Acts of the Apostles 15:28; 16:3; 21:21-26; Galatians 2:3, 11, 12

[6] Jakob Arminius: op. cit. Vol. 1, Disputation 12, The Law of God, pp. 479-480

[7] Acts of the Apostles 1:12-26

[8] John Bunyan, Exhortation to Unity and Peace, Vol. 4, Ch 4, Directions and Motives, pp. 300-301

[9] Colossians 1:24

[10] Philippians 2:17

[11] Ibid. Advice to Sufferers, Vol. 8, ch. 6, pp. 209-210

[12] Verse 5; Cf. Colossians 1:5

[13] See Deuteronomy 4:2; 12:32 Proverbs 30:5-6; Revelation 22:19

[14] Johann Bengel: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 577

[15] James Haldane: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 71

[16] George Leo Haydock: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit.,

[17] Adam Clarke: Commentary on Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CONGREGATIONS OF BELIEVERS

CHAPTER TWO (Lesson VIII)

Medieval scholar Bruno the Carthusian believes that Paul decision on a private meeting with the leading Apostles before they met the whole Council, was to make sure that when he got up before the Council to share his ministry and they began to question why he took it upon himself to exempt the Gentiles from Jewish ceremonial laws and customs, he’d be able to turn to Peter and James for them to say they supported Paul’s decision because it was the right thing to do and did not violate the Gospel in any way.¹

In addition to all that Paul dealt with concerning these false teachers, some psychologist find an inconsistency here between Paul’s earlier confession that the grace and mercy of God is what made him who he was and helped him accomplish all that he was able to do, and yet being so adamant about proving that he received both a blessing and approval from Peter and James in order to protect himself from being branded as a religious rebel without a cause. What these psychologists fail to see is that Paul’s humility is based on his being such a physically weak human being who was mentally bound to the slavery of the Law, but upon whom God showed mercy; that Paul’s spiritual assertiveness is founded on his personal encounter with the Anointed One and the anointing and Gospel message were given to him along with his appointment as God’s emissary to the Gentiles.

Paul certainly does not hide the fact that he touts his educational achievements, his Roman citizenship, his familiarity with Greek writers, and his outstanding success as a rising star in the ranks of the Pharisees. What Paul is really trying to do, however, is distinguish between what he is as a person, and what he’s become as a minister of the Gospel. In the flesh, Paul takes ownership of his attainments and standing as a result of his long hours of study and hard work. But as a servant of Jesus the Anointed One, he is what he is by the grace of God. There is no doubt that from time to time Paul unconsciously relies on his own strength to be competitive in the ministry, while consciously declaring that we should not take sides or form groups in competition with one another. It’s all part of the ongoing conflict between the flesh and the spirit in all of us.²

But Paul did not let this distraction get in the way of following the commission of the Anointed One to preach the Gospel of salvation through faith in His work on the cross. I often told my colleagues in seminary and in ecumenical gatherings that I learned more about sin, worldliness, immoral living, debauchery, and how to get to hell fast from sermons I heard in church rather than out in the world. It’s proper to preach against sin, but not at the expense of being silent on the tremendous work of God through the Anointed One on the cross to bring us salvation. Believe me, when a person is truly born again, the Holy Spirit is quick to convict them of any act or deed or word that does not please their Father in heaven. They do not need to be beaten over the head each Sunday to get the point.

These Judaizers were looking to provoke a fight and Paul refused to give it to them. They believed in being saved to the old way. But according to Paul’s theology, if it’s not necessary to get saved by your own efforts then why should it be necessary to stay saved through spiritual hard labor? That was one of his main themes, as we will see. As he would write later to the Corinthian believers, anyone who is in union with the Anointed One is already a new creation, the old passed away and everything became new.³ You may be surprised to find out how many believers today put down other believers because they only receive communion on Good Friday or Easter Sunday, or hold baptismal services only twice a year. Yes, these things are important but should never become a point of contention dividing them into groups, each one believing they are better than the other.

Now, in order to show the Judaizers that his method worked, Paul shares with them that when he went to Jerusalem to meet privately with the leaders there he took a new Gentile convert along named Titus. If you read Paul’s personal letter to Titus you’ll see that Paul already had many reasons for involving this young man in the controversy that was going on about being obedient to Mosaic Law and traditions in order to enhance one’s standing in union with the Anointed One. Although Titus was a Greek Gentile, after his conversion Paul did not insist on him being circumcised according to Jewish tradition.

Venerable Catholic scholar Thomas Aquinas offers that Timothy was circumcised and Titus was not, is that Timothy was born of a Gentile father and Jewish mother, whereas Titus’ parents were both Gentiles. And the opinion of the Apostle was that those born of a Jewish parent on either side should be circumcised, but those born entirely of Gentile parents should on no account be circumcised. If you want to read the whole story on this confrontation, you’ll find it in Acts 15:1-11. Aquinas also believes that by taking Barnabas and Titus with him, since Barnabas was a Jew but Titus a Gentile, is because they both stood as bonafide witnesses to his teaching and showed that he neither leaned to the side of the Jews or the Gentiles.⁴

Martin Luther uttered some strong words for those who opposed his separating from the Roman Catholic Church and preaching that the mass did not impart grace since the bread and wine were not transformed into the body and blood of the Anointed One. As far as Luther was concerned, if his opponents would not accept the fact that faith in the Anointed One alone justifies, he would not yield to them. On the question of justification, Luther insists that his followers must remain adamant, or else they would lose the truth of the Gospel. It is a matter of life and death. It involves the death of the Son of God, who died for the sins of the world.

If we do not surrender in faith to the Anointed One as the only One who justifies us, says Luther, the death and resurrection of Jesus are without meaning. Then the Anointed One as the only Savior of the world would become a myth. God would be a liar because He didn’t fulfill His promises. However, our insistence on believing that all of this is the true Gospel is the right thing to do because we will preserve the liberty which we have in the Anointed One. Only by preserving will our liberty be able to retain the truth of the Gospel inviolate.⁵

Let’s look a Reformer John Calvin’s insightful summation of how the Gospel should be understood. For him, the truth contained in the Gospel is what proves its genuine purity in doctrine. The false apostles did not altogether set aside the Gospel but attempted to mix it with it their own notions so as to give it a false and disguised meaning, which it always does when we make the smallest departure from “the simplicity that is in the Anointed One.”⁶ What upset Calvin is that the Vatican had the audacity to boast that only they possessed the true Gospel, which they not only corrupted with many human inventions but more than adulterated it with many false doctrines.

Let us remember, notes Calvin, it is not enough to retain the name of the Gospel, and some kind of summary of its doctrines, if it’s sterling purity does not remain untouched. Where are those who, by pretended moderation, endeavor to bring about a reconciliation between us and the Vatican? It seems that for them, the doctrine of religion, like a matter affecting money or property, could be compromised. With what abhorrence would such a transaction been regarded by Paul, who affirms that it is not the true Gospel if it is not pure!⁷

Calvin also makes a note on the subject of Christian liberty. He begins by pointing out that it deals with every believer’s conscience that is guarded by the Holy Spirit. But he claims that this is only one factor in the decision process, and it begins by our relationship with congregation laws. Doing what a religious origination says adds nothing to one’s salvation. Rather, it is meant to teach discipleship and discipline. The second factor is the matter of God’s mercy. This involves what the believer does for themselves and what they do for others in their service to the Anointed One. And the third factor is the believer’s calling to be sanctified and holy in all that they do for the Anointed One, others, and themselves.⁸

With this in mind, it is obvious how absurd the charges were against Paul that he was teaching freedom from the Law in order to promote promiscuity. This debate between those who believe that when it says that those the Son sets free are free indeed,⁹ it means freedom from being tied to obey the Law in order to be justified to stand forgiven before God. Others conclude that those who follow such an interpretation are left without any guidance or structure by which to guide their lives and that God gave the Law exactly for that reason. The one thing that seems to be forgotten is that no matter how much obedience one gives to the Law, the Law cannot justify, the Law cannot forgive, and the Law cannot save. The freedom spoken of is, therefore, the freedom to serve the Anointed One without serving the Law because the Anointed One justifies, the Anointed One forgives, and the Anointed One saves. In fact, by serving Him, the believer is fulfilling the Law perfectly.

That’s why the debate in Jerusalem by Paul and some members of the Council was so ludicrous. The reason he did not require that Titus be circumcised, is because it would add nothing to Titus’ standing with God. God did not say anywhere in the Final Covenant, “Thou shalt not be circumcised.” That lies within the purview of the believer’s freedom to choose. And since Jesus didn’t say anything against it, the believer can choose to be circumcised or not. Either way, they will be no more a child of God if they, and no less if they don’t.¹⁰

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CONGREGATIONS OF BELIEVERS

CHAPTER TWO (Lesson VII)

If this were a drama, who ought to play the part of the congregation and who might be seen in the role of Marcion, early church scholar Tertullian doesn’t leave much doubt. He speaks of Peter and the others as real pillars of the congregation being blamed by Paul for not behaving properly according to the truth of the Gospel. Yes, the same Paul who is just beginning to understand the fundamentals of the Doctrine of Grace, and the one afraid that all his work in Galatia might be in vain. Here he is now for the first time conversing with those who were Apostles before he was called. Therefore, because of the eagerness of his zeal against Judaism and a newcomer to Christianity, he thought that there was something wrong with so-called pillars of the congregation in the way they were acting in Antioch. Yes, the same Paul that would say later that he owed no allegiance to anyone, that he was willing be like those he was with in order for them to accept his Gospel.¹ Yet, here he was censuring Peter for the same conduct. How could he do this after they earlier joined hands in agreement and fellowship as believers in the Anointed One, that each one would accept the other’s views on the Gospel?² It’s obvious whose side Tertullian is on.

Then early congregation scholar Epiphanius (310-403 AD), Bishop of Salamis writes a scathing rebuttal to all the heresies current in his day. And in one section, he singled out Cerinthus (50-100 AD), a Greek agnostic who early spoke against everything that Christians claimed about the Anointed One. He tried to refute their claim that Jesus was born of the virgin Mary. That in fact, He was the son of Joseph and Mary by natural means. Furthermore, the dove that landed on Jesus at His baptism was the Holy Spirit who turned Him into a miracle worker. Also, Epiphanius reveals that when Paul went to Jerusalem with Titus, it was Cerinthus who caused all the trouble that led to the Council writing the letter to the congregation in Antioch.³

Paul also sent out a warning to the Colossians telling them that preachers would come along with the goal of changing their minds. They would do this by sounding authoritative and well-informed. The Greek noun pithanologia that Paul uses means “speech adapted to persuade.” But it also means being persuasive in a bad sense. In other words, to convince someone that what they’ve been told and believed from the beginning is wrong.⁴ This is what the Jews tried to do with the Apostles belief in the virgin birth of the Anointed One through Mary. They knew that if they could disproved the virgin birth, it would make it a lie and destroy the disciples’ and the congregations’ message.

Paul wanted the Galatians to know that the Gospel they received from him was the truth. That’s why they were able to put their trust in the Anointed One and receive forgiveness for their sins. God then put His stamp of approval on that Good News by giving them the Holy Spirit to dwell within for guidance, strength, and wisdom. This is the same thing Paul told the Ephesians.⁵ No wonder that Paul seemed to repeat the same message for the Colossians.⁶ And Paul was equally thankful that he was able to deliver the same Word of God to the Thessalonians.⁷

We know from Paul’s own words that he studied at the feet of the esteemed Jewish Rabban Gamaliel in Jerusalem. So it is possible that he may recall an incident where Gamaliel was confronted by his students when they saw him doing things that went directly against what he taught. For instance, he taught that on one’s wedding night the groom need not recite the she-ma, (“Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One”).⁸ But on his wedding night, Gamaliel recited the she-ma. So when his students confronted him, his excuse was, “I will not listen to you to remove from myself the Kingship to Heaven even for a moment.” He did the same then when his wife died and when his servant died. Making excuses for violating his own teachings.⁹ This may also be part of what Paul was warning about.

As if the doubters in Galatia didn’t hold enough proof in their hands that Paul’s preaching of the Gospel was in harmony with what the original Apostles taught and preached, he blasts another hole in their sinking ship. Some of these Judaizing brethren apparently came around to hear Paul preach his liberation theology. They wanted proof to take back to Jerusalem so they might return with a real strong memorandum from the Apostles, telling the Galatians to oppose Paul and his fellow workers in their preaching and teaching the Anointed One to the Gentiles; and not to allow them into the congregation without obliging them to observe the conservative teachings on circumcision and keeping the Jewish feasts and ordinances. But Augustine believes “...they were keeping an eye on the apostle Paul, whom they envied and wanted to be viewed with suspicion because he once served as the main persecutor of the congregations.”¹⁰

Chrysostom knew that Paul viewed these people as spies, and the sole object of a spy is to obtain information to bring about devastation and destruction. They do so by becoming acquainted with the adversary’s position. And this is what they tried, wishing to bring the disciples back to their old slavery under the Law. Also, it is apparent how contrary their purpose was to that of the Apostles, who made concessions to tolerate them until they could be removed from their positions. But the spies continued to plot even more sinister plans. Therefore, they looked around and observed closely and made themselves busybodies to find out who were uncircumcised. As Paul says, “they came in secretly to spy out our liberty.” This not only identified their conspiracy as that of spies, but by their stealthy entrance and creeping in they showed their method to be that of spies.¹¹

I found it interesting that one Jewish scholar agrees with Paul that there’s no need for Gentiles to become Jews in order to believe in Jesus. To the contrary, today the shoe is on the other foot. Messianic Jews are having to insist that a Jew need not become a Gentile in order to put their trust in Yeshua, the Jewish Messiah. This point, irrelevant for Jews in Paul’s day, and, therefore, not part of the Gospel as it was presented to them, is essential for Gentiles because it removes a major barrier, namely, the requirement, in addition to trusting God and the Good News, to leave one culture and join another. Paul saw not only that this was unnecessary, but that insistence on it was a grave danger to the truth of the Good News. Circumcision quickly became the token of the entire controversy, precisely because when a Gentile allows himself to be circumcised, he obligates himself to obey the entire Torah, plus all the oral teachings and traditions. In other words, they obligate themselves to join the Jewish people as a Jew, to become fully Jewish.¹² That’s why Paul kept telling them that their full commitment to the Anointed One, was all they needed to be in full compliance with the Torah. After all, Jesus was a Jew by birth.

The importance of this tug-of-war between Paul and the Judaizers was vital. Apparently his opponents gave the impression that they were there by the authority of the Apostle James, and perhaps mentioned the Apostle Peter as well. Paul wanted to pull the rug out from under them by stating categorically that James and Peter were in harmony with what he was doing. Therefore, the Judaizers’ claims were false, which now made them subject to questioning as to their validity and authority. Hence, Robert Gundry renders verse three this way: “However, even Titus, who [was] with me, wasn’t forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek.”¹³ Gundry points out that it actually was the result of some false brethren who came in and raised the question of circumcision and used Titus as a way of accusing Paul of being two-faced. But Paul was very clear when he said: “We didn’t yield by way of submission even for an hour, in order that the truth of the gospel might stay with you throughout.”

A contemporary of Bishop Epiphanius, Ambrosiaster, seems to take the same attitude toward Paul that Paul did toward Peter in Antioch over his eating with the Jews at the disdain of the non-Jewish believers there. Ambrosiaster notes that both history and the Epistle tell us that Paul once gave in to the pressure. Paul just said that Titus was not forced to be circumcised because he was a Greek, to which he added, because of the false brethren secretly allowed into the meeting. So it does sound like Paul gave in for a moment because of the false brethren who snuck in unawares? Otherwise, what sense would the sentence make? It is clear that Paul says, Titus did not need to be circumcised. What else does it sound like, except that Paul gave in?¹⁴

Ambrosiaster goes on to make the charge that Paul must deny that he didn’t give in even for a moment, when it is known that he caused Timothy to be circumcised because of the Jews, and went up to the Temple after purifying himself according to the Law? Why say more than that he didn’t give in even for a moment, unless they offered proof that he did? Either he wavered on giving in and did not do so because of the false brethren, or never considered giving in but did so because of them. Also, if Paul never gave in because of the false brethren’s charges, why then give in for the sake of the true believers? These are some things to consider, says Ambrosiaster, in understanding what happened there in Jerusalem.¹⁵

So it appears that Ambrosiaster was not necessarily opposed to Paul one way or the other, it only involved Paul’s statement here as being too ambiguous for the average reader. This no doubt prompted Catholic scholar George Haydock to mention that Jerome took notice that some Latin copies of Galatians read: to whom we yielded, but that was not the true reading by the Greek and Syriac texts.¹⁶ So even if Titus did end up being circumcised, Haydock follows the commentaries of Jerome and Theodoret in showing that no pressure being brought by the false brethren would have caused it to happen. No wonder that at the end of his ministry Paul said, “I fought a good fight! I have kept the faith!”

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CONGREGATIONS OF BELIEVERS

CHAPTER TWO (Lesson VI)

Pastor and writer Vincent Cheung agrees with what Chrysostom said about seeing Paul’s encounter with the Anointed One on the road to Damascus as his calling, and the Holy Spirit’s directions in the Antioch congregation and the laying on of hands as receiving his Apostleship. As Cheung sees it, Jesus was the one who called him into the ministry, but the Holy Spirit called him out to be a missionary. It is on this basis of his divine commission and not by any human recognition that Paul asserts the validity of his Apostolic ministry.¹

Current Dutch Bible scholar Alfred E. Bouter (now living and ministering in Canada), notes that as he looks here at verse two, he notes that we are finally given the details of what happened in Jerusalem, and how, after much discussion, the conclusions were reached under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is wonderful to see this. This is the background to Galatians, chapter two. Paul first met privately with James, Peter, and John to make sure that they understood each other so that there would be no difference of opinion when they met with the congregation’s council. He purposely scheduled private discussions with those who held solid and respected reputations. And what was his purpose? He said it was to make sure that his ministry among the Galatians did not turn out to be a worthless effort. Paul realized that if this challenge of the enemy was not immediately countered, his mission would be in serious jeopardy, and so he was very wise, first by having a private counsel with the top three Apostles, and then later a public statement with them.² This should be wise advice for all of us in dealing with outside or inside opposition to our ministry and message.

2:3-5 Titus was with me, even though he was a Gentile. But he did not go through the religious act of being circumcised. Some of those present, who call themselves Christians, were the ones who brought this up. They snuck into the meeting without being invited. They came there to find out if we were no longer preaching and practicing the Jewish rites, rituals, and ceremonies because we claimed the Anointed One set us free. They were only interested in getting us to go back under the Law instead of staying in Grace. But we did not listen to them nor do what they wanted us to do so the truth of the Gospel might be yours.

While the one reason for God sending Paul to Jerusalem involved sharing the news of his ministry among the Gentiles, the core reason for this visit might concern the cause of Titus being accepted as a valid member of the Congregation of the Anointed One without submitting to the rite of circumcision. But why is Paul putting this in his letter to the Galatian congregations? Perhaps he was sending a message to all the male Gentile members there, not to be pressured into being circumcised. If it was fine with the Council in Jerusalem to accept Titus that way, they need not be worried no matter what the Judaizers were telling them.³

Another striking thing about this meeting and the confrontation that took place there is that it appears Paul planned on meeting privately with the top Apostles. But somehow these legalists learned of his coming and begin plotting on how to sneak in undetected and then catch Paul off guard with their question about circumcision. They showed little interest in meeting with Paul privately to iron out any differences of opinion. They wanted to seize the right moment to openly embarrass Paul in front of the whole Council. Maybe then he would back down and give in to their demands that male Gentiles be circumcised like they demanded from their Jewish converts. So what better proof did they need than Titus standing there with Paul as a genuine born again child of God.⁴

Ben Witherington believes that Paul is not so much interested in exposing the identity of these Judaizers who came from Jerusalem to Galatia but wanted to offer and encourage them on how to properly respond to the false doctrine they were circulating throughout the congregations in the province.⁵ So Paul is now shedding more light on that meeting by sharing that not everyone was in agreement with letting the Gentiles go without being circumcised and observing Jewish holy days. In fact, Paul said he need not write this letter at all if it wasn’t for some of these individuals sneaking into the meeting and raising this issue. That’s what caused all the debate and the Council’s decision to write a response.

To pick up the storyline of Paul, Bar-Nabba [Barabbas], and Titus who were being sent at God’s command to Jerusalem to straighten out whether or not Gentiles should be forced to start practicing Judaism along with Christianity, the Council in Jerusalem decided to write a letter to the congregation in Antioch, and along with the letter they sent two leaders of the Jerusalem congregation. One was named Bar-Sabba and the other Sila. Basically, the letter said circumcision not necessary. All they asked them to do was “abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from fornication.”⁶

Alfred Edersheim tells us that as a former Jew, his understanding of this restriction on meats was not new for the Apostle Paul. For instance, when the Corinthians inquired about the lawfulness of meat sold in the marketplace or served as part of a dinner,⁷ Paul told them it could gladly be eaten without making any fuss. However, if it was revealed that this meat came out of the heathen temple after being sacrificed to idols, then politely say “No,” both for the good of the one who informed you and for your own conscience. It is obvious, says Edersheim, that Paul was aware of the Rabbinical law on this subject. For, according to Rabbi Akiba, meat that is on sale where idol worship is permitted is lawful to eat, but meat that is brought out after it being offered in idol worship, that is forbidden, because it is like the sacrifices for the dead⁸.⁹

This is not the first time these things came up in Paul’s ministry. When he met with the Elders of the congregation in Ephesus Paul told them that although they’ve heard him preach the true Gospel, yet they should be careful because, “after I depart, hungry wolves will come in among you. They will try to destroy the congregation. Also men from your own group will begin to teach things that are not true. They will get men to follow them.”¹⁰ Paul also warned the Corinthians about people who would come claiming they possessed the proper credentials and training and bragging about their résumé. But don’t trust them, says Paul, they are fakes, pretending to be commissioned by the Apostles when in fact they are self-appointed.¹¹ Even the Apostle John warned his readers of such false preachers.¹²

We like to think of the Apostolic-age congregations as being harmonious, pure, holy, and on fire for God. But it was not so. In fact, Paul warned Timothy: “They will do things to make it look as if they are Christians. But they will not receive the power that is for a Christian. Keep away from such people.”¹³ But Paul was not alone. The Apostle Peter also warned of false teachers. He said they would come in under false pretenses so that they could introduce nonbiblical teachings. This will lead to behavior that was previously forbidden.¹⁴

And Jude spoke of similar things that would happen to test the believer’s faith. He wrote: “I must write to you and tell you to fight hard for the faith which was once and for all given to the holy people of God. Some sinful men come into your congregation without anyone knowing it. They are living in sin and they speak of the loving-favor of God to cover up their sins.”¹⁵ Not only did those things happen, but there is no reason for us to believe we must still wait for it to come. It is already here and having a great effect on congregations. The only thing that will drive out such insects of darkness is the light of the Gospel.

Perhaps Paul remembered the prayer David prayed when he said: “Let the joy of Your saving power return to me. And give me a willing spirit to obey you.”¹⁶ This was also the thought of another Psalmist who told the Lord that if I never stop obeying your Word, I’ll be able to walk in freedom and not worry about being in sin’s bondage again.¹⁷ That’s why Paul told the Corinthians that wherever the Spirit of the Lord is in control the believers’ hearts are free to worship God in spirit.¹⁸ However, be constantly on the lookout for those with only one goal in mind and that is to take control of your spiritual life for the purpose of making money for themselves. This is nothing but a trap. And when you realize what really happened it will be like a slap in the face.¹⁹

Tertullian (155-240) made a comment about Marcion of Sinope (85-160), the son of the Bishop of Sinope, a port city in Turkey. As a result of being thrown out of his earthly father’s house, Marcion took his anger out on his heavenly Father. Some of his beliefs became that the God of the Jewish Holy Scriptures was an evil creator god that Jesus came to destroy. He also believed that this evil god did, in fact, reveal his will through the Jewish Holy Scriptures. Thus he believed in the “inspiration” of the Jewish Holy Scriptures being from a divine source, although from an evil source. For him, the Jewish Holy Scriptures themselves were a purely human invention, pseudo-oracles of an imaginary god. Marcion accepted only the Gospel of Luke to the exclusion of the other three Gospels. He also accepted all of Paul’s writings but he would “cut out” any Jewish Holy Scriptures quotes or anything else that contradicted his theological views. He rejected all other books of the Bible.

Although Marcion firmly believed that the Jewish Holy Scriptures revealed God’s existence as the Creator of the world. The problem was that his creation was evil, and he himself, therefore, was an evil being; it was precisely the role of Jesus, and of the Unknown God now revealed in Him, to deliver humankind from the malice of the evil creator. Tertullian believes that since Marcion rejected the Gospels and Epistles, but accepted the Jewish Holy Scriptures – the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings, that his fight with the congregation was much the same as Paul’s fight with Peter.

English writer Samuel Johnson (1709-1784), a great contributor to English literature as a poet, playwright, essayist, moralist, and literary critic, once wrote: “Great works are performed not by strength but by perseverance.”

I like what Blog writer Corinne Coppola says about that quote. That it may be short, but it has a lot of meaning behind it. Sometimes, less says more. The point that this quote is trying to make is that, one of the most important things in life is having the will to preserve even when things get tough. Perseverance means more than just trying, it means putting everything you have into something. Perseverance gives you the will, strength, and the heart to do anything that you put your mind to. You may have all the strength in the world, but if you do not have the perseverance to push yourself when things get tough, strength means nothing.

Also, Dallas lawyer Jack Robinson noted that President Franklin D. Roosevelt once said that when you come to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on. Perseverance is a very important character trait for you to be successful in life. It means determination at working hard regardless of any odds or obstacles that may exist. It is to insist and to be firm on getting something done and not giving up. In life we will not always have things going our way all the time, sometimes we will falter or fail at completing a task or getting what we want. However, by persevering and sticking to the task we will eventually overcome and be successful. For example, if Thomas Edison, the American Inventor, who invented the electric light bulb, had given up the first time he failed; maybe this marvelous invention might not have been a possibility as early as 1879. Resigning and walking out the door is never a good answer; however, persevering to the end usually reaps great rewards.

But I like best what the Apostle James said about perseverance. He tells us that great blessings belong to those who are tempted and yet remain faithful! After they prove their faithfulness, God will give them the reward of eternal life. God promised this to all people who love Him.¹ And the Apostle Paul reminds us that we must not get tired of doing what’s right. We will receive our harvest of eternal life at the right time. We must never give up.²

However, Jesus said it best when He told His disciples that there will come a day when so much evil will be in the world that the love of many believers will grow cold. But the one who remains faithful to the end will be saved. And the Good News He shared about God’s kingdom will be told throughout the world. It will be broadcast to every nation. Then the end, and the rewards will come. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

SOMETIMES, IT DOESN’T HURT TO GET CAUGHT

We may not all share the experience portrayed in this story, especially if you’ve never been pulled over by the police for speeding, but the principle involved can be applied to many other incidents. So look for the moral in this story and I’m sure it will touch your heart.

It is told by a man named Jack, who took a long look at his speedometer before slowing down He was going 73 mph in a 55 mph zone. This was the fourth time in as many months. How could a guy keep getting caught so often?

When his car slowed to 10 miles an hour, Jack pulled over, but only partially. Let the cop worry about the potential traffic hazard. Maybe some other car will clip his backside with its mirror. The cop stepped out of his car with a big writing pad in his hand. Then Jack realized it was State Trooper Bob. Bob, from his Church?

Jack sunk down into his seat. This was worse than getting the ticket. A Christian cop catching a guy from his own church. A guy who happened to be a little too eager to get home after a long day at the office. A guy he would be playing golf with tomorrow.

Jumping out of the car, Jack approached the friend he saw every Sunday, a man he’d never seen in uniform before. “Hi, Bob. Fancy meeting you like this.” “Hello, Jack,” Bob replied with no smile. “Guess you caught me red-handed in a rush to get home to see my wife and kids,” Jack replied. “Yeah, I guess so, said Trooper Bob.” His policeman friend Bob seemed a little uncertain. “That’s good,” Bob mumbled. “I’ve seen some long days at the office lately, said Jack. I’m afraid I bent the rules a little bit – but just at the wrong time.”

Bob toed at a pebble on the pavement. “My wife Diane said something about our having roast beef and potatoes together tonight. Know what we mean?” “I know what you mean,” Jack nodded his head up and down. I also know that you have a reputation in the for being a tough trooper.” Oh my Lord, thought Jack, this is not going in the right direction. Time to change the subject.

“What speed did you clock me at, officer Bob?” “Seventy,” replied Bob. And would you do me a favor, Jack, and get back into your car, please?” “Now wait a minute, snapped Jack. I checked my speed as soon as I saw you. I was barely nudging 65 mph.” Telling this lie seemed to come so easy for Jack with every ticket he got. “Please Jack,” said Trooper Bob in a stern voice, “please get back in your car.”

Flustered, Jack squeezed himself through the slightly open door. Slamming it shut, he stared at the dashboard. He was in no rush to open the window. The minutes ticked by. State Trooper Bob scribbled away on the pad. Why hadn’t he asked for a driver’s license, thought Jack? Whatever the reason, it would be a lot Sundays before Jack would ever sit near this cop in church again. A tap on the window jerked his head to the left. there was policeman Bob, a folded paper in hand. Jack rolled down the window a mere two inches, just enough room for officer Bob to pass him the slip.

“Thanks a lot.” Jack sneered, as he rolled the window back up with anger. Bob returned to his police car without saying a word. Jack watched his retreat in the mirror. Jack unfolded the sheet of paper to see how much this foolish stunt was going to cost him. Wait a minute! What was this? Some kind of joke? It’s certainly not a ticket. Jack began to read:

“Dear Brother Jack, Once upon a time I had a daughter. She was six when she got killed by a car. You guessed it – a speeding driver. A fine and three months in jail, and the man was then let go. Free to go home and hug his other daughters. All three of them. I only had one, and I’m going to have to wait until Heaven before I can ever hug her again. A thousand times I’ve tried to forgive that man. A thousand times I thought I had. Maybe I did, but I needed to do it again. Even now. Pray for me. And be careful, Jack, my one son is all I have left.” Signed, Brother Bob.

Jack looked at his side-view mirror just in time to see Trooper Bob’s car pull away and head down the highway. Jack watched silently until it disappeared. It took a full 15 minutes of thinking before Jack was finally able to pull away and drive home at the speed limit while praying for forgiveness. When he got home, he hugged a surprised wife and kids after he walked through the door.

Lots of times we forget that when anyone, be it a stranger, acquaintance, or even a close friend has a job to do, they must follow the rules. They cannot be partial just because of familiarity. That not only involves those in law enforcement but also in Gospel reinforcement. So the next time you hear your pastor or some evangelist call out a particular wrongdoing that a fellow believer you know did that violated God’s Holy Word, remember this story. There’s no reason for them to get angry with the Holy Spirit because they got caught and He is sending them a message. Remember, there are many of God’s children who were not only hurt but was lost because of the same activity they are now feeling guilty about. God will never give out a ticket or fine for breaking His Word and Will, but He will certainly send a warning to keep any of His children out of Satan’s hands. – Dr. Robert R. Seyda

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CONGREGATIONS OF BELIEVERS

CHAPTER TWO (Lesson V)

On the other hand, says Calvin, the agreement of all who teach in the congregation is a powerful aid for the confirmation of faith. Since, therefore, Satan was laboring so maliciously to hinder the progress of the Gospel, Paul resolved to meet him head-on. Once he knew that he succeeded in demonstrating that he held the same views with all the other Apostles, every hindrance was removed. Weak disciples were no longer perplexed by the inquiry, who should we emulate. His meaning may be summed up this way: I did this so that all my hard work might not be thrown away as trash, I put to rest the question which distressed many minds, it helped prove that both Peter and I deserve your confidence; for in all that I taught he and I were in perfect harmony. Calvin stated that if many teachers in his own day were as heartily desirous as Paul was to edify the congregation, they would take more pains to be in agreement among themselves.¹ To that, we all say “Amen” for our day as well.

One main underlying factor that compelled him to go to Jerusalem was to ensure that all of these new Gentile converts would be accepted as part of God’s one true congregation as fellow brothers and sisters to the believers throughout Judea and elsewhere. Paul mentions a fourteen-year time period here, and that’s a lot of sermons, a lot of conversions, and a lot of new believers in Jesus the Anointed One, the Son of God. It was Paul’s prayer that all of his preparation and all of his travels and hard work would not prove in vain. Revivalist John Wesley (1703-1791), suggests a paraphrase of Paul’s comments on his running in vain, and has the Apostle saying: I want to find out whether or not I should keep running the race, or had already run it in vain; I didn’t want to lose all the fruit that came out of my past and present labors. I didn’t want any disagreement to hinder the spread of the Gospel, I wanted them to be fully satisfied both of my mission and my doctrine. How beautifully, says Wesley, these words run together in expressing the swift progress of the Gospel in that day.²

How many times did you stay up late praying and working on a sermon, then got into your car and drove several hours to a meeting; stood behind the pulpit in front of a small congregation, and after delivering an inspired message no one came forward for salvation; no one was moved to rededicate themselves to the Lord, so you asked yourself later, “Was it worth it?” Truth is, we may not know until the books are open in heaven. Paul wanted to make sure everyone understood that he was carrying out the mission given to him by the Anointed One. But more importantly, he wanted to make sure that those brought into the Kingdom of God benefited from the long hours he spent, by knowing that his conversion with the Apostle was accepted as valid by congregations everywhere.

The great Greek storyteller Æsop (620-564 BC) told this fable that might be used to illustrate the point that Paul makes here about his willingness to listen but an unwillingness to bow to pressure. The Wind and Sun were disputing which was the stronger. Suddenly they saw a traveler coming down the road, and the Sun said: “I see a way to decide our dispute. Whichever one of us can cause that traveler to take off his cloak will be regarded as the stronger. Wind, you begin.” So the Sun retired behind a cloud, and the Wind began to blow as hard as it could upon the traveler. But the harder it blew the more closely did the traveler wrap his cloak round him, till at last the Wind gave up in despair. Then the Sun came out and shone in all his glory upon the traveler, who soon found it too hot to walk with his cloak on. The Sun succeeded where the Wind failed. What can never be done by a violent confrontation may often be accomplished by gentle persuasion. That was Paul’s attitude, and he won!

Literary churchman John Edmunds (circa 1800-1874), Fellow of the University of Durham, points out that the purpose of Paul’s visit to see the Jerusalem congregational Council was that the Judaizers held two things against him upon which they made their complaint. One was that he preached justification without any involvement of the Mosaic Law. And second, that he offered salvation with justification before God to both Jew and Gentile alike, putting them on the same level in God’s eyes. However, this visit was well planned by Paul. He met openly with the Council after he met privately with James, Peter, and John. In the private meeting, he was able to discuss details, argue any sticking points, and answer any objections they might offer. As Edmunds sees it, this is the right way to settle many disagreements peacefully. Officers in the congregation need to understand the details while the public need only be informed of the outcome³.⁴

Joseph Beet (1840-1924), offers a compelling argument on why we need to understand the importance of the visit by Paul to Jerusalem. Paul’s purpose implies that upon the approval of his teaching by the other Apostles depended on the permanent success of his past and present labors. If it turned out that a great difference existed between the teaching of Paul and the earlier Apostles, Christianity would perish in its cradle. For, the sole and sufficient proof that the Gospel as preached in the early congregation was actually taught by the Anointed One, and was the unanimous testimony of the leaders of the congregation. That principle holds true today.

Beet goes on to say that if Paul’s Jewish opponents in Jerusalem,⁵ or Corinth,⁶ or Galatia⁷ were able to successfully appeal to Peter, their appeal would prove irresistible. It would either discredit his teaching or create serious doubt as to what his actual teaching of the Anointed One involved. Discord between Paul and the Apostles would shake the faith of his converts and prevent the congregation from spreading outside of Israel, making his years of labor totally in vain. His claim of a direct calling from the Anointed One would then be met with scorn and ridicule.⁸

While Beet does make a valid point, it is difficult to imagine that a person as feisty as Paul and as full of zeal in response to the Anointed One’s personal calling on his life, would pack up his documents and go back to Tarsus to take over his father’s tent-making business. It is my opinion, Paul’s response to such a charge would not earn for him the authority to do to Peter in Jerusalem, and in Antioch, having been thought of as a crybaby who folded so quickly in the face to criticism from his Jewish counterparts. Rather, Paul would have gone off and with the backing of the Antioch congregation and continued to spread the Gospel throughout the Roman Empire. Meanwhile, Peter and the others on his side would have seen everything crash around them when the Roman General Titus came in 70 AD to destroy the city of Jerusalem. So praise God for Paul and Peter seeing the need to stay unified.

James Denny (1856-1917), again speaking about the death of the Anointed One, but this time he focuses on Paul’s reference to an angel who might come preaching another Gospel. But this does not set up a confrontation between Paul and some heavenly being. Rather, it is the logical conclusion drawn from the very first commandment God gave to Moses, “I am ADONAI your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. You are to have no other gods before me.”⁹ So if anyone, even an angel, came bearing a gospel other than the one Yeshua the Messiah brought, which was given to Paul, let them be treated like the angels who rebelled against God under the leadership of Lucifer.¹⁰ That would not only make them a fallen angel but one bound for the bottomless pit like Satan.¹¹ That’s why Paul says in chapter one, verse eight, let them suffer the timeless curse of everlasting punishment.¹²

Denny then goes on to point out that the Prophet Isaiah also spoke of the day coming when ADONAI will punish the powers of the high heaven, and the kings of the earth here on earth.¹³ This certainly presents a picture of two ruling forces, those in the unseen world and those in the seen world. They are not at war with each other. In fact, they are in league with each other. That’s why the forces which Jesus faced when He came to earth were so formidable. And that’s the reason He must defeat the human forces against Him as the Son of Man, but also, as the Son of God take the keys to hell, death, and the grave and hold them only in His hands.¹⁴

Kenneth Wuest wants us to understand this fear on the part of the Apostle Paul most certainly does not mean that his past fruitful labors which resulted in the conversion of many sinners and the establishment of a number of congregations would be rendered null and void simply because they would not get the approval of the Jerusalem congregation. It must be that Paul attached great importance to the esteem that his preaching to Gentiles would be held by the Jewish Jerusalem congregation and the Council. Wuest says, that when we think of the strong biases and prejudices among some of the converted Pharisees in the congregations in Jerusalem and in Judea, this feeling of anxiety that his work may be disowned, would be a natural thing.

His real fear, says Wuest, was that those in authority in the Jerusalem congregation, by insisting on the Mosaic ritual of circumcision might spoil his past and present efforts at establishing congregations that would be free from all connections with the Mosaic Ceremonial Law being set aside at the Cross. Paul saw that in the existing situation, there was a danger that his work would be rendered as having no value to Christianity by the opposition of the Jerusalem congregation; that the disapproval of the Twelve would earn such repercussions in the congregation to seriously handicap his work. He took great care to prevent Jewish ceremonial law from being forced upon the Gentiles and the unity of the Christian congregation broken into Jewish and a Gentile branches.¹⁵

Thomas Lancaster also sees Paul’s anxiety about running the race in vain as similar to a runner who takes off from the starting line like a flash and soon leaves the rest out of sight far behind. Even when he slows down they don’t seem to be catching up. But he continues for miles, so he assumes that he’s in the lead until someone yells at him, “Hey, you’re off course and you’re running in the wrong direction.” So in Paul’s case, nothing good comes out of expending one’s whole effort to proclaim a Gospel proven to be formulated in error?¹⁶ And not only in Paul’s case but in our case as well. Make sure you understand it, are able to prove it by the Scriptures, and feel the anointing of the Spirit when you share it before you propose any different understanding of God’s Word than the traditional interpretation.