Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson XVII)

These faithful church scholars then pointed out to the heretic Manes what else Paul said to the Galatians about those who came in after he left and called them false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into Apostles of the Anointed One. However, that shouldn’t surprise anyone, they told him, because Satan often transforms himself into an angel of enlightenment.¹ What a great thing it is, therefore, when true ministers are transformed into real messengers of the light of the Gospel! They also informed Manes that Paul further points out just what kind of people these Judaizers were so they could understand how they were being misled. So just as Paul expressed surprise that the Galatians were so quick to turn away from the true Gospel, so the Bishop warned his congregation that such people as Manes might do the same to them.²

What makes it even more touching, is that, as Chrysostom said in his writings, Paul would not have been so moved and devastated by their falling away were it not for the fact that he thought so highly of them to begin with. Chrysostom marveled that in Paul’s reprimand, especially after seeing how quickly and how far away they fell from the truth, that he still held a favorable and highly exalted opinion of them.³ And in another place, Chrysostom writes that any believer who is carried away after a long time is worthy of censorship, but the one who falls at the first attack and in the initial skirmish shows that they are weaklings in their faith. That’s why Paul expresses his frustration by saying “What is this, that those who deceive you do not need much time, but their first assault on the Gospel sufficed to defeat and capture you?” If Paul thought of them as mere nobodies and easily deceived, says Chrysostom, he would not have been surprised by what occurred. So it’s no wonder he fought back so hard to get them to turn around and go the way he originally showed them.⁴

Ambrosiaster, an early church commentator (366 AD), was also stunned by the Galatians’s behavior. He wondered how often does a person run away from happiness to unhappiness. No wonder Paul was astonished at the stupidity of people who deserted their place of safety and subjected themselves to the pointless grief of getting lost. Ambrosiaster likens it to a confused sailor who was safely anchored in port as a terrible storm approaches but decides to set sail and be tossed about by the strong winds and huge waves. It seems that the Galatians were acting the same way because their foolishness caused them to be cut loose from the Rock Jesus the Anointed One, and consequently be made to endure the pains of shame under the yoke of the Law with no hope of relief in sight.⁵

The way Ambrosiaster sees it, this turmoil was all caused because although what these false teachers preached was essentially additional teachings added to what all the Apostles proclaimed, nevertheless they were being turned away from the truth. So it wasn’t that Paul was being jealous, it was that he was depressed that they were such easy prey for these Judaizers. I respectfully disagree with Ambrosiaster in that Paul was jealous that the Galatians found these Judaizers so much more convincing than he was.

Augustine of Hippo was clear in his explanation of the Gospel that Paul spoke about. As he sees it, any so called gospel of human origin is false, for every human being is capable of not telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth.⁶ Whatever divine revelation that is shared by any person must first come through that person from God, not from any human source. And so the term “Gospel” cannot be applied to what is of pure human origin. Such were the claims put forward by those who sought to lead the Galatians in a different direction. God called them out from sin’s slavery into the joy of freedom in Grace through Paul, now the Judaizers were pulling away from that freedom of Grace back into sin’s terrible slavery.⁷

Medieval commentator Haimo of Auxerre feels that these Judaizers wanted to alter the Gospel by changing it from addressing eternal things of the Spirit into daily duties of the flesh under the Law. They are unable to do this by using the Gospel because the Gospel is unshakable and true. Indeed, if any gospel is so easily changed, it cannot be the true Gospel. Therefore, while there are some people who can be moved away from the correctness of the Gospel, the Gospel itself remains forever unchangeable because the One who brought it is unchangeable⁸.⁹

Theodoret, Bishop of Cyr, believes that Paul is saying that the Judaizers did not cause the Galatians to depart from the Gospel given to them by the One who then called them. For the same God who gave the Law is the One who gave the Gospel. He is the author of both. So how could they be turned away from one to the other and say that one was good and the other bad? There is no other Gospel. God would not say one thing in the Law and another thing in the Gospel. Neither would the Holy Spirit inspire Paul and the Apostles to preach one Gospel and then inspire others to preach a different gospel. The Galatians came up with no alibi or excuse for changing. For the Lord does not preach some things through us and others through the other apostles. What these Judaizers were doing was trying to get the Galatians to trade in their being yoked together with Jesus the Anointed One to then be yoked to the Law alone. The yoke of the Anointed One gave Jesus the opportunity to lead them on the path to everlasting life, while the yoke of the Law by itself led them on the path to condemnation and death.¹⁰ While I appreciate the Bishop’s point of view, Paul did call the preaching of the Judaizers “another gospel.” It was this “other” gospel that caused them to discard the yoke of Jesus for the harness of the Law.

Bruno the Carthusian takes a somewhat different view. Not only was Paul astonished at the speed and ease by which the Galatians were misled, but was also astounded that they so quickly discarded all that he told them about God’s plan of salvation. The Gospel he preached lifted such a great weight off their shoulders, only to have them turn around and allow these Judaizers to weigh them down again. The tragedy was that none of this old burden was of any use. In a way, Paul saw them as being so insensible to the point that they became senseless. Their call to salvation through the Gospel was by grace, now they so quickly exchanged it for salvation by works that was the cause for them being so lost in the first place.¹¹

Years later, the venerable Thomas Aquinas would offer these comment:

Paul refutes their error by showing the authority of the Gospel teaching: First, by showing their instability by lightly dismissing the Gospel teaching he does three things: First, he enlarges upon the guilt of those who were misled for their instability of mind. Hence Paul says, I’m astonished. As if to say: Although you are aware of the many good things already mentioned that were given you through the Anointed One, and although I instructed you well, nevertheless you have migrated so far that you’ve completely removed yourself in such a short time from where you were to where you’ve migrated. With this word he alludes to their name, because Galatians were known as “migrants.” It’s as though Paul is calling these believers “migrants” because they moved away from what they were taught. Secondly, by commending the authority of the Gospel’s teaching, he suggests that in view of the precious value of that which they so lightly regarded the Good News, their error is seen to be so much the greater. He amplifies their guilt in contrast to that which they abandoned. For if one’s intellect withdraws and is removed from evil, it is worthy of praise and does well; but when it departs from the good, it must bear the guilt. And this is how they were removed from good. So Paul says to them: Although it is amazing that you are so quickly and so far removed, there is additional reason for wonder, namely, because you have removed yourselves from God, and from faith in Him that called you into the sharing of the eternal good which we have through Jesus the Anointed One. Thirdly, he amplifies their guilt on the part of that to which they have turned, because they have been turned not to good but to evil. Hence he says, unto another gospel, namely, of the Old Law, which is a good message only insofar as it does announce some good things, namely, temporal and carnal. Yet it is not completely perfect as is the Gospel, because it does not announce the wholesome and loftiest goods, but small and slight ones. But the New Law is perfect in the full sense a Gospel, namely, a good message can be because it announces the greatest goods, namely, heavenly, spiritual and eternal. And although it is another gospel according to the tradition of the deceivers, yet according to Paul’s preaching it is not. For it is different in the promises, but not in its representation, because the same thing is contained in the First Covenant and in the Final Covenant: in the First, indeed, it is a representation, but in the Final it is the real thing. Therefore it is another gospel if you consider the outward appearances; but as to the things that are contained and exist within, it does not qualify as another gospel.12

Reformer Martin Luther takes a pastoral approach in dealing with the situation in Galatia. He shows such patience in dealing with his seduced Galatians! He does not pounce on them but, like a father, he tries to help them see the consequences of their error. With parental affection he talks to them, yet he does it in a way that also lets them see how upset he is. On the other hand, he is highly indignant at the seducers whom he blames for the defection of the Galatians from the truth. Paul’s indignation flares up in a manner expected from any sorely disappointed father. “If anybody else comes around preaching any other Gospel than the one you received from me, let them be shunned as demonic.” What drives Paul to do what he’s doing is a spiritual rule which he himself will explain more fully later on. That’s where he says: “Brethren, if someone is entrapped by a serious mistake, those of you who spiritually strong, restore that person to spiritual health in the spirit of meekness. Always keep in mind, the same thing might happen to you.¹³”¹⁴

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson XVI)

The Apostle Paul was very much aware of certain Messianic Jews who were going around trying to convince believers to observe all their Jewish customs and manners to reinforce their new Christian beliefs. He warned the Romans of the same thing.¹ And Paul was afraid that the Corinthians might fall into the same trap that brought down Adam and Eve. He told them, “I am afraid that you will be fooled and led away from your pure love for the Anointed One. You listen when someone comes and preaches a different Jesus than the One we preached. You believe what you hear about a different spirit and different good news than that which we preached.”²

So his message to the Galatians was that there was no other Gospel than the one he received from the Anointed One and preached to them. Paul knew that such false teaching would only bring disharmony and discord in the Church. Such preachers didn’t want the people to know what God thought, but what they thought.³ In fact, Paul called them false evangelists, who not only lied about the Gospel but also made up stories about their success.⁴ The last thing Paul wanted was for all the work he accomplished in the churches throughout Galatia to be squandered away because of false doctrine.

Kenneth Wuest gives us a very perceptive definition of what Paul meant by “another gospel.” The Apostle uses two Greek adjectives, both of which mean “another,” but distinctly “other” in kind. In verse six he uses the Greek adjective heteros, which means “not the same in nature, a different class, a different kind.” Then in verse seven, he uses the Greek word allos, which means “another of the same kind.” So the adjective heteros denotes qualitative differences, while allos quantitative differences. Therefore, heteros distinguishes one out of many, and allos denotes one along with many others.

Let’s put it in today’s language by using a modern item as an example. You go down to your local bakery to buy a pie. There in the glass case, you see a variety of pies made with various ingredients and flavors. You pick out one that reads, “Home-made Apple Pie.” But when you get it home, and after you’ve made a hot cup of coffee, taken out the vanilla ice cream, and heated the pie in the microwave, you begin to eat it. But there’s something different about it. Yes, it looks like apple pie, smells like apple pie, but when you eat it you notice an unfamiliar taste. It isn’t until you read the ingredients that you discover the crust was made of rice flour and artificial ingredients flavored to taste like apple.

So what the Apostle Paul is telling the Galatians about his Gospel and the gospel of the Judaizers is that these false prophets are trying to sell their gospel as being a new and improved version of Paul’s Gospel when in fact it is an artificial gospel at best. And for Paul, anything different from what he brought them as the Good News cannot be good at all. Actually, it is misleading and, therefore, misguiding. Paul’s doctrine of grace is God’s truth, and anything that differs in kind from it must necessarily be false doctrine.⁵

Can you imagine the listeners throughout Galatia hearing their Bishop read the opening salutation of Paul’s letter and thinking, oh my goodness, he really wants us to know that he’s the man of the hour and we are privileged to get a letter from such a highly regarded Apostle. And there’s little reason to believe they weren’t shocked by his sharp and sudden accusation of their backsliding and believing in heresy.

Paul leaves no doubt that he is overwhelmed and appalled that after all he went through to preach to them the Gospel that so completely changed their lives, now he hears they are deserting it. What hurts even more, is that they were also turning their backs on him and becoming followers of an imitation gospel. In other words, Paul felt jilted and rejected; he was truly heartbroken. That’s why he wrote this epistle, he wanted a fair debate with the Judaizers who were using his absence to say whatever they needed to say to redirect the Galatians back to their point of view.

There is an interesting allegory in Jewish literature about four men named, Azzai, Zoma, Aher, and Akiba who entered Paradise.⁶ Akiba told his three colleagues ahead of time that when they arrive at the desert mirage of pure marble, don’t yell, water, water! For God said that anyone who sounds a false alarm will not be accepted in His sight. We are told that as soon as Azzai took a look, he died, for it is said: “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints.”⁷ Then Zoma took one look and became demented, for it is said: “When you find honey, eat enough to be satisfied, but don’t overeat and end up vomiting.”⁸ Then Aher looked and became disillusioned and began trying to destroy the reeds surrounding the mirage in order to get to the water. Jewish scholars explain that this was a reference to his backsliding and becoming a Christian heretic. But Akiba looked but kept going unhurt. Some say that in Paul’s mind, these were represented in the congregations throughout Galatia. But the worst of all were the ones who acted like Aher, whose full name was Elisha ben Abuyah, an erratic scholar who twisted God’s word and gave it his own meaning.

Before he came preaching this good news, these people knew nothing of God’s new plan of salvation through Jesus the Anointed One, that replaced the old plan of covering their sins by way of animal sacrifices. If Paul had not come, they may have all died unrepentant in their sins. Could it be that he travel that far as a sick man, lived under the most spartan conditions to bring them the Gospel, and now they’re about to throw it back in his face? We can almost pick up a sense of panic in Paul’s writing. It’s like listening to a counselor trying to talk someone out of a suicidal jump. What’s even more startling is that in doing such a thing they were also turning their backs on God. It would be one thing if Paul wrote this letter year’s after he last saw them, but it appears that Paul just recently talked to visitors from that area. No sooner did he depart and these false teachers arrived. Apparently, they were skillful at persuading people; these Christians were not yet mature, and the situation was very serious.

It wasn’t that these false teachers traveling through Galatia were preaching a completely different gospel involving another the Anointed One; nor were they declaring diverse doctrines offering another salvation without the Anointed One. They were simply distorting the real Gospel of Jesus the Anointed One so that it fit their own particular brand of belief. Today some are doing the same thing, but with greater insult. Instead of “adding” to the Gospel that Paul preached, as the Judaizers did in Galatia, today’s false prophets are “deducting” from that Gospel. To give an alternate interpretation to the Gospel here and there may be reconcilable, but to teach that “God is dead,” and “deny the virgin birth of Jesus,” and question or even eliminate the existence of the “Holy Trinity,” and even “doubt that the Anointed One died to atone for our sins so we can be acquitted of God’s wrath, but that His death was only to cover them up so they can’t be seen but they are still there:” and then “argue that the Bible is not the ‘inspired Word of God’ but mere stories, allegories, and myths,” is not only insulting to the message but also taints the messenger as being a reprobate.

We find an astonishing confession in Church History by Eusebius (260-339 AD) where he notes that in the writings of the earliest pillars of the Church, as well as the Apostles themselves, all received and taught those things which they and others maintained through the centuries. In one of the writings of these men was the account of the heresy of Artemon (230 AD) who was a nontrinitarian in Rome who believed that Jesus was a man whom God adopted to be His Son. In fact, even Paul of Samosata the Bishop of Antioch (200-275 AD) became a believer in this adoptionism of Jesus doctrine. So it appears that the error of the Galatians in accepting another gospel kept being repeated.

Eusebius goes on to say that up until Pope Victor I (189-199 AD), the thirteenth Bishop of Rome, came to power the truth of the Gospel the Apostles preached was preserved in its original form. But once he died and Pope Zephyrinus succeeded him in 199 AD and ruled until 217 AD, the truth of the Gospel started being corrupted by the inspiration of men, not by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Even though what they begin to teach was contradicted by Holy Scriptures, as well as the writings of certain brethren older than the times of Victor, who wrote against Greek and Roman philosophers in defense of the Gospel truth, and against the heresies of their time.

Among these writers were a Christian scholar named Justin Martyr (100-165 AD); Tatian the Syrian Christian writer (120-180 AD); Titus Clement of Alexandria (150-215 AD); African scholar Miltiades (244-314 AD), and many others, all of whom ascribed divinity to Jesus the Anointed One. By that time most church scholars knew of the works by Irenaeus and Melito, and the rest, which declared that Jesus the Anointed One was both God and man. Plus, there were the psalms and hymns which were written from the beginning of the founding of the church, celebrating Jesus the Anointed One as the living Word of God, ascribing divinity to Him. Since the doctrine of the Church, then, was proclaimed for so many years, how was it possible that those who preached Paul’s Gospel up until the time of Pope Victor, in the same manner as the apostles before them, were now being replacing the inspired words of Paul and others by the ideologies of men?⁹

In 278 AD, Archelaus Bishop of Carrhae held a public dispute with a well-known heretic named Manes who was a manic follower of the Persian prophet named Mani. He was the son of the leader of a Jewish Christian sect called the Elcesaites, part of the Gnostic¹⁰ movement which prevalent at that time. But at the age of twenty-four, he saw a vision in which his “heavenly twin” told him to leave his father’s sect and preach the true message of Jesus. So he went to India where he studied Hinduism and soon his gospel was quite different than what Jesus taught. So when he came to Carrhae, a prominent city in Persia, a debate was held with Manes and top church thinkers. The main topic of the debate was obedience to the commandments in the Bible and the teachings of Jesus concerning sin. They reminded him of Paul’s warning about those who came preaching another gospel without Jesus the Anointed One.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson XV)

Alfred E. Bouter (born 1943) offers an interesting description of where the believer stands in relationship to their new life in the Anointed One. As he sees it, this is the basis of everything, we are on resurrection ground, but how did we get there? It is only because of the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus, without His sacrifice we have nothing, and what a tremendous sacrifice it was! He not only paid everything that was owed to God and the Law by giving His all! Who can fathom the greatness of His sacrificial gift, the immense ransom that He paid? Paul mentions to the Corinthians that even though God’s grace and salvation are free to them, it needed to be paid for.¹ Who can calculate that price? No one can. Here we see how the Lord Jesus gave Himself for our sins, we see Him as the atonement offering without which we would be eternally lost. This is a wonderful reference to the work of the Lord Jesus, the redemption that He accomplished for us. And for what purpose? Paul tells the Galatians here in verse four, “So that He could deliver us out of this present immoral world.”²

One highly respected British scholar and theologian Daniel Lancaster (born 1963), made this observation on the dialogue between Socrates, Philebus, and Protarchus which included the subject of being willing to sacrifice.³ As Lancaster sees it, for the One who sacrifices Himself for the good of others, did not sacrifice Himself that they may be saved from the persecution which He endured here on earth for their sake, but rather that they in their turn may be able to undergo similar sufferings, and like Him stand fast in the truth. While the Apostle Paul may or may not have read Plato, he certainly subscribed to this motto. No doubt that is why he admired and revered the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus the Anointed One on our behalf.

Philip Ryken (born 1966), eighth President of Wheaton College makes the point that when it comes to the facts about the Anointed One in the Gospel and His crucifixion, resurrection, cross, and an empty tomb, there is not one single word about asking for our help. The Gospel is not about what we do for God; it is about what God did for us. The Father is the One who came up with the Gospel plan. The Son is the One who made the willing sacrifice to fulfill His Father’s will. Although mankind put Jesus to death, the Father raised Him from the dead in order to provide the necessary power needed for our salvation. Therefore, all glory goes to God. If salvation is God’s work from beginning to end, then all the honor and majesty belong to Him forever. Ryken goes on to point out that if all glory goes to God, then what comes to us is only by grace. Grace is God’s favor shown to undeserving sinners as a free gift. The Jews thought that the Law was all they needed for salvation, but we know that as Christians, Jesus is all we’ll ever need.⁴

When wise young Daniel received his vision of the last days showing the Archangel Michael picking up his trumpet and announcing that all those whose names are found written in the Book will be transformed, and those who are asleep in the dust will awake to everlasting life. Daniel wrote: “And those who are wise – the people of God – will shine as brightly as the sun’s brilliance, and those who turn many to righteousness will glitter like stars forever and ever!”⁵

1:6-7a But I’m astonished that you are so suddenly turning away from God, who out of His love and mercy decided to share with you everything He has given to the Anointed One. I can’t believe that you have transferred your allegiance to follow an imitation version of the “good news,” which in fact is really “bad news.”

What Paul is describing here sounds very familiar to what the Psalmist said about the children of Israel.⁶ And the Lord complained to Isaiah that His people showed respect to Him with their mouths, and honored Him with their lips, but their hearts were far from Him. Their worship of Him is worth nothing. The teachings they now follow were made up by humans.⁷ And God told the prophet Jeremiah: “My people have done two sinful things: They have turned away from Me, the well of living waters. And they have cut out of the rock wells for water for themselves. They are broken wells that cannot hold water.”⁸

Several scholars note that among the many papyri⁹ discovered in an ancient rubbish dump near Oxyrhynchus in Egypt at the end of the 1800s, among them were letters in which one person expressed dismay at not receiving a return letter from someone they wrote to earlier. In their remarks, they used the terms, “surprised” and “distressed,” to describe their feelings of disappointment. Some also believe that what Paul is explaining here is not so much surprise or distress, but his being “perplexed” by what he heard about the Galatians’ sudden abandonment of the Gospel brought to them by a proven man of God and adopting the teachings of those with no such endorsement from God or the Anointed One. Other commentators such as Norwegian Bible scholar Nils A. Dahl concluded that Paul did not purposely leave out his ordinary greetings, but exchanged it for an expression of astonishment and disapproval. Either way, the Galatians must have known right away that Paul was not rejoicing over what he heard.¹⁰

This portrays the Galatians’ departure from the way that Paul led them to by the Gospel, is like a runner on an obstacle course headed toward the finish line and suddenly goes off course and starts running on a path that leads away from the finish line. That’s why he felt so perplexed by their decision. The path that Paul put them on was cleared of obstacles by Jesus who ran this course successfully, but the path they were now following retained all these obstacles so that the Galatians must now learn how to get over or get by each one of them in order to proceed. Unfortunately, they were not headed for the finish line but back to the starting line. It could also be seen in what we call a defector, someone who goes over the line into what is the enemy’s territory. In this case, they left God’s Gift of Salvation through Grace to go over to self-redemption through the Works of the Law. There is every indication that Paul never expected something like this to happen. So his surprise was enveloped with astonishment. This left him wondering how such a thing could happen.¹¹

A. T. Robertson (1863-1934) draws, what he calls, a picture word in explaining what Paul meant by this sudden shift by the Galatians away from the Gospel he preached to them. The Greek verb metatithēmi means “to change places, to transfer.” But it isn’t someone else who is moving them, they are transferring themselves and doing it so quickly on very short notice. To this was not some gradual shift from the time of their conversion in their position concerning God’s grace. No, it began shortly after the Judaizers came to town and tempted them with their artificial doctrine of grace. Robertson mentions that even in his day there were some Christians that fell victim to similar perverters of the Gospel. If it was an amazement to the Apostle Paul, it is equally as much of a surprise to believers today that so many are so silly and so gullible to modern descendants of these ancient charlatans.¹²

To make this even more confusing, there seems to be uncertainty as to how much influence these false teachers were having on Paul’s converts in Galatia and the degree to which they became compliant by conforming to what they were being told to do. Paul fears that the Galatians seemed to have wanted to begin an alternate course that was often followed by Gentiles who converted to Judaism. As such, they obviously put plenty of value on this the things they were told would come their way by following the alternative path. No doubt that made Paul feel even more bewildered by their actions. Paul considered all of this quite ironic for the Galatian Gentiles seeing how God received them and counted them as being right with Him before they knew anything about the Law. So why would they now be persuaded to get involved with something that proved to be unnecessary in the first place? How could they give equal importance to the Good News of their freedom in Grace that Paul brought them with the bad news they were given on becoming prisoners of the Law by the Judaizers? No wonder Paul felt complexed and heartbroken.¹³

But just like he told the Corinthians, Paul was not writing this to shame them, but to let them know that a big mistake was being made and they needed to know how to turn things around. So what he is writing here he wrote out of love, not out of malice.¹⁴ And just as Paul wrote the Thessalonians, he also wanted to Galatians to know that God chose them because they accepted the Gospel Paul preached to them so that they could share in the glory that Yeshua was to receive as the Anointed One.¹⁵ Paul shared the same message with Timothy.¹⁶

Paul did not want the Galatians to forget that it was by the loving-favor of the Lord Jesus that they too were given the opportunity to trust God for their salvation from the punishment of sin that was coming on all the world as were others.¹⁷ This must have stuck in Paul’s mind when he later wrote the Romans where he told them the same thing.¹⁸ After all, Paul knew what he was talking about because it was what brought him into fellowship with God and the Anointed One.¹⁹

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson XIV)

American theologian and Greek professor at Yale Divinity School, Benjamin Bacon (1860-1932), has quite a lot to say about the doctrine of our Christ’s sacrifice on our behalf, as stated here in verse four, which was one Paul “received” in his old life from the believers whom he persecuted.¹ This led to the growth of his own primitive faith in Jesus our Christ that was able to survive the assaults of Judaism. But Paul always avoids the cruder form of the “substitutionary” doctrine. In this form, Jesus is said to have died “in our place,” as opposed to Paul’s own doctrine of His death being “on our behalf.”² In non-Pauline writings of the Final Covenant it rests upon the Isaiah doctrine of the Suffering Servant.³ This doctrine of substitution is pre-Christian. It was used by the authors of second and fourth Maccabees to explain the sufferings of the Maccabæan martyrs.⁴

For Bacon, Paul seems to take special pains to avoid both the phraseology and the implications of the substitutionary theory, which conceived the suffering of Jesus in a more moral sense.⁵ But to Paul, the sinful conditions out of which the children of God must be delivered were the consequence of “their own sins.” Therefore, these provides the ultimate explanation of our Christ’s suffering so that the First Covenant description of sacrifice “for sin” becomes appropriate.⁶ In other words, the substitutionary theory is that any of us could have died on the cross for our sins. But that is not the case. Jesus did not just substitute for us. He was, in fact, the only one who qualified to die on our behalf; to do something none of us could do in order to obtain something we could never obtained – God’s forgiveness and justification.

In fact, says Bacon, the whole story of Jesus’ earthly career and destiny is for Paul something he sees as almost lost in the excelling glory of the supernatural drama of His coming, death, and resurrection. For Paul, the Gospel consists essentially of nothing else but the transaction by which the preëxistent Son of God obediently humbled Himself through human incarnation and death, and was for this reason exalted to God’s right hand.⁷ This cosmic drama is conceived under the forms of Israel’s redemption from bondage in Egypt.⁸ That’s why verse one expresses Paul’s apostleship in a nutshell, and verse four his message.⁹

Also, the Vicar of West Hendren, London, England, Cyril W. Emmet (1875-1923 AD) discusses his understanding of the present evil world and the world-to-come. The Revised English Version has the word “age” in the margin to imply that the English word “world” not only means a period of time but includes the people who live in it and its characteristic features. That’s because in Jewish theology a distinction is made between “this age,”¹⁰ and “the age to come.” There was also the “age of our Christ,” and of the “kingdom of God.” These are not just periods of time, but periods of civilization and religious thought, also called dispensations.

No doubt, says Emmet, popular thought distinguished between the two ages as successive periods of time, divided by a definite crisis, or catastrophe, but the Christian interpretation the two æons overlap. In other words, one does not abruptly stop and the other immediately begin. The idea of such a distinction in time is still with us and hope looks forward to the future unmistakable establishment of the sovereignty of God at some definite date. But the distinction between the two ages becomes rather moral and spiritual; even in this era Christians enjoy the blessings and possess the powers of the dispensation to come; they are already in a sense delivered “from this present evil world,” and made ready for the spiritual world-to-come.¹¹

As professor Vincent Cheung sees it, when Paul wrote that our Christ “gave Himself for our sins,” we may ask ourselves, “Why is this relevant?” Cheung believes that this is a good example of how a positive statement about the Gospel counteracts a false gospel, or how sound doctrine eliminates distorted teachings. We are “rescued” because our Christ “gave Himself,” and not because of our good works or how good we think we are. Once it is established that this is the Gospel of our Christ, that should settle the issue. This is because, as Paul will soon point out, if being right with God could be gained through the law, then our Christ died for nothing.¹² That is, the idea that getting right with God can be done by simply following the law, that makes the sacrifice of our Christ null and void. In other words, the one cancels out the other. However, to be a Christian is to affirm that our Christ gave Himself on behalf of our sins. This was something we could not do. Therefore, that self-righteousness being gained through the law cannot be part of the Christian Gospel, nor is anyone a Christian who can affirm that their righteousness was obtained this way.¹³

Scholar Robert H. Gundry (born 1932), whom we quoted earlier, sees the term “wicked world” (KJV) in verse four this way: It defines the peace of God and of Jesus our Christ in terms of the health and glorious living that will distinguish this life from eternal life in the age-to-come. That’s because it will be free from the evil that characterizes mortal life in this day and age. Since we’re living in the present evil age, deliverance “out of it” looks to the future for an awaited deliverance in that the crucified and resurrected Christ now lives in the believer.¹⁴

Also, “in accordance with the will of God,” means that just as a son should do what his father requests, in like manner Jesus our Christ obeyed God His Father in giving Himself up on our behalf for our sins to deliver us from this present evil age. God’s will for Him to do so leads Paul to designate God also as “our Father,” for a father looks out for the welfare of his children.¹⁵ And this benevolent fatherhood of God leads Paul to declare that eternal glory, which means the eternal praise and honor that belongs to God alone, will also be shared with us.¹⁶

What better way to end this first salutatory section than giving praise, glory, and honor to God and our Christ forever and ever? When King David announced to his people that Solomon would be building the new Temple and asked for their donations to help in the construction, before thanking them he thanked God and praised His glorious Name.¹⁷ And in the psalm written for Solomon, after describing his qualities, and extolling his future, then David turns and says, “Blessed be the LORD God, the God of Israel, the only one who does wondrous things, and blessed be His glorious Name for ever, and let the whole earth be filled with His glory; Amen, and Amen.”¹⁸ And when it came to Paul’s gratefulness for what our Christ did for him, Paul was quick to say, “Therefore, unto the King forever, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.”¹⁹

This was quite common for Paul to give God the glory in all things and for all things. He told the Romans, “For of Him and by Him and in Him are all things. To Him be the glory for the ages. Amen.”²⁰ And to the Ephesians Paul said, “In Him in whom likewise we have obtained an inheritance, having the way already marked out beforehand according to the purpose of Him who works all things after the counsel of His own will, so that we should be to the praise of his glory, those of us who first trusted in our Christ.”²¹

Richard N. Longenecker (born 1930), long-time professor of theology at Wycliffe College, notes that when Paul says here in verse four that our Christ “gave Himself for our sins,” he was either thinking of our Christ’s redemptive work,²² or of being given by God for that purpose.²³ Longenecker believes that Paul’s statements are rooted in Jesus’ own statement about the purpose of His mission.²⁴ In addition, Jesus’ statement seems to have been derived from Isaiah’s fourth Servant Song,²⁵ which our Lord used to highlight His own consciousness of being God’s Righteous Servant.²⁶ Longenecker helps us see where so much of what the Evangelists say that Jesus said is often rooted in the writings of the First Covenant.

Professor Ronald Y. K. Fung (born 1937) informs us that God’s “glory” (Greek doxa) in general denotes His divine and heavenly radiance, His loftiness and majesty, but since it appears here with article the, it may refer to that unique glory which belongs to God alone. When it is examined in this context, “the glory” may be more specifically taken as God’s fatherly character and the union of perfect wisdom, holiness, and love manifested in the redemption of mankind through our Christ according to His will

Fung continues to say that the description of this glory as being “forever and ever” implies that in the eternity which is comprised of endless successive generations, that union of wisdom, holiness, and love will continue to be a fundamental aspect of God’s glory.²⁷ So it is only right that Paul would add the word “Amen,” which enhances the force and confirms the veracity of his declaration. The declaration may contain at the same time a summons to acknowledge God’s glory and to live in its light. Seeing this is so, the listeners’ responded “Amen” to Paul’s “Amen.”²⁸ Then as the letter is read it would take on added significance as a pledge to endeavor to ascribe glory to God by their lives, as well as an endorsement of Paul’s ascription of glory to God at this point in the letter.²⁹

“No amount of good deeds can make up for a bad attitude.” This comes from a movie script and said by a character known as Optimus Prime, who is also known in Japan as “Convoy,” a fictional character from the Transformers franchise. However, even though spoken by a robot, it was written by a human and, therefore, is worthy of examination.

We see this played out almost everyday when someone tries to make up to a person of whom they said or did something that made them feel bad or look bad in the eyes of others. I guess it would take a huge calculator to add up all the times in history that a husband has tried to calm down his wife for something he did or didn’t do that made her angry. But until the bad attitude is taken care of, the bad words and deeds will keep on being repeated.

Not much is written about his in psychology literature because there are so many variables and situations to deal with. But there are articles on why we should apologize and say “I’m sorry.” For one thing, it helps build respect. It’s a two-way street. By saying I’m sorry it shows that you have respect for the person you offended. Then you’ll asking for forgiveness help build their respect for you.

Another thing that happens by saying I’m sorry, is that it breaks down barriers in the relationship so that both can move on to better things. Acknowledging your own mistakes helps you grow and mature. Saying I’m sorry also provides a stronger foundation for the relationship to build on. Look at it this way, offenses are like cracks in the foundation that need to be repaired before the building can continue. And the one element that can repair these cracks is Love.

And each time you say I’m sorry, it makes both of you feel more comfortable and your own integrity is improved so that others will trust you more. If they know how quickly you recognize when you’ve said or did something that embarrassed them and apologize, the more they are willing to forgive. And saying I’m sorry helps bring relief when taken as a promise that you won’t do it again. Even if they are not as quick in accepting your apology, you know you’ve done the right thing.

But there’s a trap involved in each one of these, as Optimus Prime points out, don’t apologize just to get the issue behind you. The more often you apologize and then make no changes in your attitude, the less people will believe you when you say I’m sorry. No matter how many times a person apologizes for yelling “he’s got a gun!” in a crowded theater, if they keep on doing the same thing over and over, then no one will believe them if someone does, in fact, have a gun. As Benjamin Franklin once said, never ruin an apology with an excuse.

But the Bible is not silent on this subject. Jesus explained that when we try to look religious in hopes it will cause people to respect us, when we know there is some word or deed we need to apologize for and haven’t done it, all our praise and worship, testimonies and prayers will not make up for it.¹

And the Apostle James tell us to always tell each other the wrong things we have done. Then pray for each other. Do this so that God can heal us. Anyone who lives the way God wants can pray, and great things will happen.² In other words, not being ready to say I’m sorry will affect your spiritual life as well as your daily life.

But all of this is of little value if it’s only used as a temporary fix to a bigger problem. It’s like putting a small band-aid on a ruptured artery. There must be a change in our attitude. Try to find out what makes us do these things again and again. The Bible gives us a real clues. For instance, King Solomon reminds us that what comes out of our mouth can be either that which promotes life or that which leads to violence.³ And Jesus endorses this same idea when He called the arrogant Pharisees and Sadducees a brood of vipers who were trying to use their tongues to say something nice while they were so awful inside. It’s the hurtful things you say or do that really tells us what’s in your heart.⁴

So giving you wife a bouquet of flowers or handing you children a dollar bill just to make up for something hurtful that you said or did is not enough. Even apologizing is just the start, not the finish of the needed process. We should all keep this prayer of King David in mind: Search my heart, O God, let me know what’s in my heart; test me so I can know what makes me anxious or upset. Point out to me anything that offends you or others, and lead me to the good path that goes on forever.⁵ – Dr. Robert R Seyda

YOU’RE NEVER TOO OLD TO LEARN

With schools all over the country headed toward graduation, I read this story by an individual who did not identify himself by name. But having taught in schools for thirteen years I can relate to it. But it’s more than just the story, it’s the message it brings. I hope you enjoy it.

In looking back, the young gentleman tells how on the first day of school their professor introduced himself and encouraged us to get to know someone we didn’t already know. As he stood up to look around, he felt a gentle hand touch his shoulder. He turned around to find a wrinkled, little old lady beaming up at him with a big smile that lit up her entire being.

She said, “Hi handsome. My name is Rose. I’m eighty-seven years old. Can I give you a hug?” He laughed and enthusiastically responded, “Of course you may!” and she gave him a giant squeeze.

“Why are you in college at such a young, innocent age?” he asked. She jokingly replied, “I’m here to meet a rich husband, get married, have a couple of children, and then retire and travel.” This made him almost double over in laughter. “No seriously,” he asked. He was curious about what may have motivated her to be taking on this challenge of completing her college education at such an advanced age. “I’ve always dreamed of finishing my college education to earn a degree, and now I’m getting one!” she replied with a smile.

After class they walked to the student union building and shared a chocolate milkshake. They became instant friends. Every day for the next three months they would leave class together and talk nonstop. He was always mesmerized listening to this “living time machine” as she shared her wisdom and experience with him.

Over the course of the year, Rose became a campus icon and she easily made friends wherever she went. She loved to dress up and she reveled in the attention bestowed upon her from the other students. She was really living it up.

At the end of the semester they invited Rose to speak at their football banquet. He said he’ll never forget what she taught them. She was introduced and stepped up to the podium. As she began to deliver her prepared speech, she dropped her three by five cards on the floor. Frustrated and a little embarrassed she leaned into the microphone and simply said, “I’m sorry I’m so jittery. I gave up Ensure for Lent and this Five Hour Energy Drink is making my head spin! I’ll never get my speech back in order so let me just tell you what I know.” As they all laughed she cleared her throat and began speaking:

She told them that we do not stop playing because we are old; we grow old because we stop playing. There are only four secrets to staying young, being happy, and achieving success, and they are:

1. You have to laugh and find humor in something every day.
2. You’ve got to have a dream. When you lose your dreams, you die. We have so many people walking around who are dead and don’t even know it!
3. There is a huge difference between growing older and growing up. If you are nineteen years old and were to lie in bed for one full year and don’t do one productive thing, you will still turn twenty years old, but you won’t grow any smarter. I am eighty-seven years old now and if I stayed in bed for a year and never did anything I will turn eighty-eight. So anybody can grow older. That doesn’t take any talent or ability. The whole idea in life is to grow up by always looking for opportunities that help you mature.
4. Have no regrets. The elderly usually don’t have regrets for what they did, but rather for things they didn’t do. The only people who fear death are those with regrets.

She concluded her speech by courageously singing “The Rose.” The whole room grew silent as she sang in her somewhat quivering voice:

Some say love, it is a river, that drowns the tender reed
Some say love, it is a razor, that leaves your soul to bleed
Some say love, it is a hunger, an endless aching need
I say love, it is a flower, and you, its only seed

Its the heart afraid of breaking, that never learns to dance
Its the dream afraid of waking, that never takes the chance
Its the one who won’t be taking, who cannot seem to give
And the soul afraid of dying, that never learns to live.

After she finished, she challenged each of person in the hall to study the lyrics and live them out in their daily lives.

At the years end Rose finished the college degree she began all those years ago. Then, just one week after graduation Rose died peacefully in her sleep. Over two thousand college students attended her funeral in tribute to the wonderful woman who taught by example that it’s never too late to be all you can possibly be.

Remember, GROWING OLDER IS MANDATORY, GROWING UP IS OPTIONAL.

I was thirty-four years old before I was able to go back to college to finish my undergrad education. It would take another ten years before I experienced the joy of walking across the platform to receive my doctorate degree in theology. I’ve never stopped wanting to learn. I’ve found that it gives me a purpose everyday for being here on earth.

Each morning now, my wife Aurora and I pray and tell the Lord that we are ready to serve Him in whatever way He chooses to use us. That’s why we can’t wait to wake up in the morning looking for the plans God has for us each day. You are going to grow old whether you want to or not, but continuing to grow up is your decision. We’ve decided that rather than spending our day we want to invest in our day so that instead of ending at the end feeling spent, we end up feeling enriched. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson XIII)

Methodist Bible scholar Adam Clarke (1760-1851), has an interesting explanation of what he feels Paul is talking about when he refers to “this wicked world.” From Clarke’s perspective, these words cannot mean created nature, or the earth and its system, nor even worldly people. Created nature is the environment in which we live; worldly people cannot be avoided. In fact, they are those who, when converted, form the Church, and by the successive conversion of sinners the Church grows and is maintained. The followers of God must live and labor among sinners in order for them to be converted. As Clarke sees it, the Apostle, therefore, must mean the Jews, and their system of legal ordinances; laws based on their customs and teachings that makes life hard to live,¹ including their whole religious structure, which mandated burdens of obligations that neither they nor their ancestors were able to carry².³

John Edmunds (1801-1874) touches on a point here in verse four not often seen in commentaries on Galatians. From what he writes, we can conclude that because God the Father “gave His Son for us,”⁴ it must be seen as different than, “He gave His Son on our behalf,”⁵ or to put it another way, “on our account.⁶ This distinctly declares the death of our Christ to be a “sin-offering,” a willing sacrifice for the sins we committed. It is only here in Paul’s salutation that the Doctrine of the Atonement is introduced, says Edmunds, and it appears that Paul did so for a special reason. His argument with the Judaizers involved convincing the Galatians to exchange the sacrifice of our Christ under grace for the sacrifices of animals under the Law. How could they come up with any rite, ritual, or ceremony that could overshadow what Jesus did for them on the cross.⁷ Furthermore, once the animals are sacrificed they were then eaten by the priests, but after the Lamb of God was sacrificed, the Father raised Him from the grave to live forever. Why, for one thing, because He never needed to be sacrificed again.⁸ Perhaps this is what passed through our Christ’s mind when He told His disciples, this is my body given for you; this is my blood shed for you as a sacrifice on your behalf.

Alvah Hovey (1820-1903) feels that it is better to retain the article (“the”) in verse five of the original text before the word “glory.” That would mean that “the glory” referred to must be either that which is due to God for His gracious will in the work of redemption, or that which “especially and alone belongs to God,” and is, therefore, a definitive glory. In this way the Apostle enriches his address and salutation to the churches of Galatia with the principal truths which he is about to defend as the only true Gospel. Among these truths are the sacrificial death of our Christ, His resurrection by the power of God, His divinity and union with the Father, His direct agency in making Paul an Apostle, and the fact that all this was done in obedience to the Father’s will.⁹ That is “the eternal glory” of God the Father that Paul is referring to.

Irish professor and theologian W. A. O’Conor (1820-1827) sees the leading doctrine of the Gospel and its practical result distinctly stated in here in verse four. It was the tendency of the Judaizers to lower the death of our Christ to the normal level of a common death. This was the reason why Paul was so vigorously opposed the introduction of Jewish practices into Christianity. Our Christ died for our sins, not in the way that a Jew, accustomed to rely on formal offerings in the Temple, would suppose, but with the view of delivering us from the kingdom of evil. Furthermore, for O’Conor. “Age” or “eternity” primarily relates to time, and is used to express the duration of this world or the next. Here it means the spirit or fashion of this world, and deliverance from it means acquiring the tastes and spirit of the world-to-come. Our Christ died to enable us to live according to the laws of eternity, not according to the immediate and urgent claims that our life here on earth is all we’ll ever have.¹⁰

American Baptist clergyman and missionary George Whitefield Clark (1831-1911), makes a good point here in verse four that we should always keep in mind. When Paul noted that the Lord Jesus our Christ “gave Himself for our sins.” But let us not forget that He also gave Himself to His ministry; gave Himself to ridicule; gave Himself to be beaten; gave Himself to be hung on a cross; and yes, gave Himself to die as a sacrifice for OUR sins. Not that He substituted for us, there was no place for us on Mount Calvary; only a spotless Lamb qualified for that cross in the middle, and so He gathered up all the sins of the world and took them to the cross as a willing sacrifice to pay the price for forgiveness and freedom from the death sentence that hung over OUR heads, not HIS head¹¹.¹²

Marvin Vincent (1834-1922) is quick to point out that when Paul talks here in verse four about how our Christ gave Himself for us that we could be saved from the influence of this sinful world, it is in an ethical sense, involving the course and current of this world’s affairs as corrupted by sin.¹³ That’s why Paul uses the Greek verb enistēmi which means “close at hand, present.” He does this in contrast with the world-to-come. We see this same word used again and again.¹⁴ Furthermore, Vincent disagrees with those expositors who say that this world implies the period of wickedness and suffering that will precede the second coming of our Christ. This would imply a limitation on our Christ’s atoning work meant only for the period before He returns to set up His millennial kingdom. It’s more than that, it is our eternal salvation tied to eternal life.¹⁵

The Reverend Frederic Rendall (1810-1906) believes we need to understand that by simply using the term “sacrifice for sin” to define what our Christ did on the cross, it does not carry the full impact that it should. The writer of Hebrews felt the need to make it clear that there were various sacrifices made on the altar in the Temple.¹⁶ He quotes from the Psalms where it says that God was not pleased with many of the sin offerings made through the sacrifice of animals.¹⁷ It involves the difference between “Forgiveness” and “Atonement.” Under Jewish ceremonial law, forgiveness was repeated each time a sin was committed, but atonement was made only once a year. The penalty one paid to cover one’s sins could be anything from a small dove to a lamb or goat. But the sacrifice for Atonement is clearly stated in Levitical Law.¹⁸ The blood of the daily sacrifices were poured out next to the Altar within the Temple Inner Court, but the blood of the Atonement sacrifice was taken into the Holy of Holies. So when John the Baptizer pointed to Jesus and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world,”¹⁹ he was talking about the Lamb to be slain for Atonement. And as in the case of Jesus our Christ, it would not be done once. His one sacrifice was sufficient for all time from that day on Mount Calvary on into eternity.²⁰

Scottish theologian and preacher James Denny (1856-1917), comments with admiration on the central place the death of our Christ on the cross has in the preaching of the Gospel by the Apostle Paul. But another thing that amazes him was that over time there have been many attempts made that, although Paul teaches what he does about the cross, try to dampen it down, to make it less important. This, Denny believes, can be traced to a purely individual interpretation of the death of Jesus. But what these interpreters have come up with has no Scriptural authority behind it because it is, what Denny calls “a theologoumenon.”²¹

Even a casual examination, says Denny, of what they are saying is inconsistent with itself, it represents patchwork made up of ideas from here and there with incompatible elements as an answer to what they see is as a crisis of controversy over their cloaking the cross of our Christ with doubt. But there is no denial that the words of the Apostle Paul have such virtue in them that they combine to lift us up to a higher unity in Christian testimony and theology. But it is important to point out certain characteristics in Paul’s presentation of his teaching which place an impressive barrier in the way of those liberal-minded professors and preachers who try to get around it.

Foremost is the assurance with which Paul expresses himself. The doctrine of the death of our Christ and its significance was not merely Paul’s theology, it was his Gospel as we see here in verse four. It was at the core of everything he preached. It is constantly on his mind – immediately after the mention of the Lord Jesus our Christ, who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present world with all its evils – that, he says to the Galatians later, even if we or an angel from heaven should preach another kind of good news to you that is not the one we preached, let him be cursed²².²³

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson XII)

When Paul opened this letter he mentioned that it came not only from him but from all those brethren who were with him at the time he dictated this letter. This in no way should be taken to imply that they helped him write this letter. Rather, that they were in full agreement with what he was saying in this epistle.¹ But it does not rule out that some of them informed him of what they heard concerning the Galatians churches. Paul brings his opening to an end with a big “Amen,” after having ascribed all honor and glory to God the Father forever and ever. We find this phrase of the permanency of God’s glory first in the Song of Moses where he sang: “Adonai will reign forever and ever.”² And this should be the ultimate aim of our lives, ministry, and message; doing and saying what results in lifting up the name of our God and honoring the name of our Lord and Savior, Jesus our Christ.

Bruno the Carthusian (1030-1101) reminds us that since our Christ surrendered Himself to be tortured and crucified on our behalf in order to purchase our freedom from sin’s bondage so that He might fulfill the will of the Father, therefore, we should direct all honor and glory to Him for the price He paid for our redemption. The glory for our salvation does not go to the Law or to the philosophy of past or present sages. It all belongs to Him both now and forever. To this Paul says Amen, meaning that it is absolutely true and is affirmed both in heaven and on earth.³

John Calvin (1509-1564) believes that by this sudden exclamation of thanksgiving, Paul intends to powerfully awaken in his readers the contemplation of that invaluable gift which they received from God, and in this manner to prepare their minds more fully for receiving instruction.⁴ And James Haldane feels that Paul’s call for giving all glory to God includes the fact that because His handiwork in the heavens does not reveal His hidden plan of salvation, He sent His Son with the Gospel so that all of His treasures of wisdom and knowledge that is hidden in our Christ could be revealed. This was God’s doing; this was God’s will; this was God’s plan to allow those who believe to become part of the mysterious fellowship with Him that is found through union with our Christ.⁵

John Owen (1616-1683), makes the point that although grace is freely given, it needed to be purchased. That’s why Paul told the Corinthians that it cost God immensely to purchase our freedom from sin’s bondage.⁶ And the Apostle Peter said that it was the precious blood of our Christ.⁷ But this was not a new revelation, Jesus made it clear that He came to give His life as a ransom for many.⁸ As Paul would tell young Timothy, this was the price of our redemption.⁹ So yes, grace is free to us but it wasn’t free to God. That’s why He is called our Deliverer,¹⁰ So since God’s free gift of grace liberated the sinner from the bondage of sin’s captivity, is there anything greater or more satisfying than to serve Him for serving us? That was part of Paul’s declaration here in verse four. Later, he would tell the Thessalonians that part of the deliverance was to free us from the wrath of God to come upon sin and sinners¹¹.¹²

William Law (1686-1761) was a priest in the Church of England who lost his position at Emmanuel College, Cambridge when his conscience would not allow him to take the required oath of allegiance to the first Hanoverian monarch, George I. That was an important thing in those days as the translators of the Authorized Bible (KJV) found out, which caused them to dedicate it to King James in order to get it printed and disbursed. Thereafter, Law continued as a priest and when that too became impossible without the required oath, Law taught privately, as well as wrote extensively. His personal integrity, as well as his theological writings greatly influenced the evangelical movement of his day as well as Enlightenment thinkers such as the writer Dr. Samuel Johnson and the historian Edward Gibbon. Law’s spiritual writings remain in print today.

In one of those writings in which he called for all believers to live a devout and holy life, he wrote about how difficult it was for a Christian to practice humility because of the general spirit and temperament of the world. This then requires believers to live contrary to the world as it relates to ethics, morals, and religion. But he points out that many rich, great, and well-educated individuals in his time were looked upon as imposing figures. They were heralded and applauded by the world. And just in his lifetime, William Law saw many of them die and then fade quickly from view as though they suddenly disappeared into thin air. They were then discarded by the world as if they were mere bubbles of water.

So if that happened to them, then what about those who face the same fate of heaven being lost and how they must lie in their graves waiting for a miserable eternity once they are called to stand judgment. Even though they dedicated themselves to years of service, the current generation feels as though they can do without them and be just as happy as if they were never here. So why would any Christian think it worthwhile to lose even the smallest degree of virtue for the sake of pleasing such undependable peers and false friends like those in the world? Law asks: Is it worthwhile to pay homage to such an idol as this, that so soon will have neither eyes, nor ears, nor a heart, to respect you, instead of serving that great, and holy, and mighty God, that will make all His servants partakers of His own eternity?

Law wants to know, who will let the fear of a false world, that has no lasting respect for them, keep them from the fear of the God, who created them that He may love and bless them with eternal life? And finally, they must consider what behavior the profession of Christianity requires of them with regard to the world. Law says, it can be found in the words of the Apostle Paul who declared his unshakable allegiance to the One Who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil world.”¹³ Therefore, being a Christian and serving God through our Christ implies that one must be delivered from any commitment to this world in order to win their friendship. That goes for every believer who must live contrary to everything this requires to be part of their lifestyle. They and their world will one day pass away, but heaven will never pass away as it awaits all those who remain faithful until the end.¹⁴

Baptist preacher Charles Simeon (1759-1836), preaching on the subject of the great object of our Christ’s coming, focuses on what Paul says here in verse four. As Simeon sees it, the influence of Christianity has certainly raised the level of morals wherever its teachings are disseminated, but complete conformity to the Christian code is rarely, if ever, seen. Where do we find people living according to the pattern of our Christ and His Apostles? Where does the cross of our Christ stand out so clearly that those who look upon it see their sins crucified on its cross-beam, or themselves having been crucified there with our Christ?¹⁵ This feeling is utterly unknown, except among a few; who, for that very reason, are despised and hated by the world of sinners around them.¹⁶ The truth is, that when it comes to practicing what they preach, Christians, in general, differ very little from either Jews or Gentiles. Christianity occupies their heads, but heathenism rules their hearts. They pretend to have faith: but, as for “the faith that overcomes the world,” they know little about it.¹⁷

Simeon goes on to lament that their whole life, instead of being occupied in a progressive transformation of the soul into the Divine image of our Christ, it remains in a state of conformity to the world.¹⁸ Furthermore, the Apostle James says that instead of regarding “the friendship of the world” as decisive proof of their being out of harmony with God’s will end up wanting the world’s friendship, seeking it, and then glorying in it.¹⁹ In Young’s Literal Translation it reads like this: “May counsel [decide] to be a friend of the world, an enemy of God.” The Complete Jewish Bible renders it: “Whoever chooses to be the world’s friend makes themselves God’s enemy!”

Then Simeon makes an appeal to his listeners. Whether or not all that he said so far may not apply to everyone. Furthermore, those who claim to be dead to the world may or may not be as signs and wonders to this current age. Know this, however, that they who achieve such status are not only a light to this world and to all believers, and the only thing that keeps anyone from reaching such higher ground is that the knowledge they claim to have, or all the experience they assert to have assembled is nothing but learned ignorance, and counterfeit belief. Listen to what the Apostle John states so clearly: We know that we are from God and that the whole world struggles under the power of the Evil One²⁰.²¹ In reading this it reminded me of the Apostle Paul’s appeal to the Corinthians that ended with these challenging words from the prophet Ezekiel: “That is why the Lord said, ‘Leave them; separate yourselves from them; don’t touch their filthy things, and I will welcome you.”²²

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson XI)

We see that later on in John’s revelation, he was able to see that when the Lamb took the Book of Life from the hands of God, the four living beings and the twenty-four elders knelt before Him and begin to sing this song: “It is right for You to take the Book and break its locks. It is because You were killed. Your blood bought people for God from every family and from every language and from every kind of race from every nation. You made them to be a Holy Nation of religious leaders to work for God. They will be the leaders on the earth.”¹

Then John looked again and saw a multitude of people from all around the world, and they too stood before the throne and before the Lamb and they sang their song to Him: “We are saved from the punishment of sin by our God Who sits on the throne and by the Lamb!” Then all of the angels standing around the throne and around the leaders and the four living beings got down on their faces before God and worshiped Him. They said, “Let it be so! May our God receive worship and shining-greatness and wisdom and thanks and honor and power and strength forever. Let it be so!”² So our question should be, who in their right mind would surrender such freely given eternal joy for the temporary pleasures which this temporary world offers by selling their soul to Satan? Remember, Paul said that the wages of sin was eternal spiritual death.

All of this, says Paul, is not by happenstance or accident, it is all part of God’s eternal will. Like David said, “I am happy to do Your will, O my God because your Word in my heart is guiding me from within.”³ Paul told the Romans that this guidance from within is due to the indwelling Holy Spirit.⁴ Not only that, but by having the Holy Spirit living and operating in us, we are given a taste of what’s to come.⁵ And this did not come by chance. No, it came because we were chosen to be partakers in God’s promises and glory.⁶ In other words, it is all a gift. It did not come to us because of anything we were, did, or deserved. Oh how wonderful is the love, mercy, and grace of God through our Christ!

So we can only imagine how happy Paul was when he wrote the Romans and told them that they too were chosen to be part of God’s eternal plan of salvation, not only now but forever.⁷ And to the Thessalonians Paul wrote: “May our God and Father make your hearts strong and without blame. May your hearts be without sin in God’s sight when our Lord Jesus comes again with all those who belong to Him.”⁸ So we do not need to wait until the day of resurrection to feel like we belong to Him, we are already His, and His as long as we allow Him to hold us and claim us as His own.

From Augustine of Hippo’s (354-430 AD) point of view, how much more should people refuse to claim the credit for themselves if they perform any good work, when the very Son of God in the Gospel said that He did not brag on Himself.⁹ Nor did He come to do His own will but the will of Him who sent Him!¹⁰ This Will and Glory of the Father, the Apostle now commemorates so that he also, by the example of the Lord who sent him, may signal that he does not seek his own glory or the performance of his own will in the preaching Gospel. Just as he says a little later, “if I were to seek to please people, I should not be called a servant of our Christ.¹¹”¹²

Early church scholar Ambrosiaster (335-397 AD) represents our Christ’s free offer of Himself to redeem us this way: When the human race was still held captive by the devil, the Savior offered Himself to him on our behalf, and the devil was willing to take Him. Our Christ’s purpose was to deceive Satan by the strength of His power. The devil was willing to take Him but would be unable to hold Him, and in that way our Christ was able to remove from the serpent what he wrongfully held captive.¹³ In other words, after Adam and Eve were thrown out of the Garden of Eden, the devil held all of Adam’s descendants hostage while they waited for a Savior to come and redeem them by paying the required ransom. So Jesus showed up and offered Himself in their place so that they could go free. But Satan was the loser because not only did Jesus escape three days after He was taken, but by doing so provided a way of escape for any other of Adam’s descendants who are held hostage to sin as long as they believe in Him and accepted Him as their deliverer.

Furthermore, “It was God the Father’s decision” for Jesus to die. So no matter how hard the self-righteous Galatians tried to be good by their own efforts, and observe all the ceremonies, feasts and customs to be set free, they could never outdo what Jesus did for them in giving His life as a ransom for their freedom, nor improve on God’s decision to provide salvation through the obedience of our Christ. So if they were offended by Paul’s teaching that our Christ’s sacrifice superseded all the animal sacrifices of the Jewish religion, they were in fact questioning God’s decision.

In these remarks, Paul helps us better understand the difference between being certain of who we are, as opposed to being proud of who we think we are. In order to be certain of anything, we must know for a fact what we believe. I cannot remember how many times I’ve encountered believers who were not sure they were really redeemed and set free. They found too many things in their lives that did not measure up to the expectations of others, or the standards of holiness their church taught them to attain and then maintain.

One way to help them understand was by asking if there was any doubt in their mind about their biological birth. Did they have a birth certificate? Did they have the witness of their doctor, their mother and father? Maybe they didn’t turn out to be what their parents hoped for, and in some cases completely disappointed their family; but that does not cancel out the fact they were born into that family. Perhaps some don’t feel that they are all God wants them to be or that they’ve disappointed their heavenly Father. But that does not change the fact they were born again into His family. Paul was certain about his conversion, his calling, and his commission, and so should we. Is there any way a person who is uncertain can change? The Apostle Paul believes so.¹⁴

Most recently, with the growth of the Messianic Jew congregations around the world, their study of Paul’s letter to the Galatians raised concern about how converted Jews are supposed to treat the Torah and Law of Moses in light of what Paul says to the Jews who become believers in our Christ. This is why Messianic Jews are often asked: “Have you read Galatians?” One Messianic Jewish commentary notes that Paul’s use of the Hebrew term “shaliach” (English “apostle”) which means “sent one,” refers to someone on a mission. Such shaliachim were not new, since the Sanhedrin sent out such apostles to Jews who were scattered all around in the nations of the known world at that time.

So Paul was quick to point out that he was not sent by the Church’s Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, of whom James and Peter were high ranking members. But when Paul mentions all the brethren who are with him, some scholars point out that there was a synagogue in Antioch called the “Synagogue of the Christians”, or as it might be rendered, “Synagogue of the Messianics.”¹⁵ So it is important, says the Jewish writer, for any believer, whether they be of Jewish or non-Jewish backgrounds, to understand what was going on here in Galatia.¹⁶

So perhaps we can see why the Jewish converts throughout the churches in Galatia were so irritated by the presence of a growing number of non-Jews in their midst. Could it be that they were the ones who sent for these emissaries from Jerusalem and invited them to come in order to straighten out the situation. The non-Jews were sticking by Paul’s Gospel that the Law was void and no longer necessary for a believer to be true follower of our Christ, but the Jewish members were sure that circumcision and the Torah should still be followed. As a matter of fact, in many Messianic Jewish congregations today, at the beginning both Jews and non-Jews were told to keep the Torah. However, recently, the non-Jewish converts were given a reprieve and may follow the Torah only if they want to.

The Jews saw themselves as God’s chosen from the time of Abraham, while the non-Jews claimed no calling whatsoever, and were only invited in and treated responsibly as the Torah commanded all Jews to do, even to any stranger or foreigner who came to their village. So the Messianic Jews saw themselves as somewhat superior. Why else would they join Peter for a meal and leave their non-Jewish brethren to eat with Paul? We saw some of this in what happened to Paul as recorded in Acts of the Apostles.¹⁷ And perhaps even more, the non-Jews were proud to include the cross as a sign of their deliverance, while for the Jews it was an offensive object. This animosity seemed to follow Paul everywhere he went to establish congregations of Jewish and Gentile believers in Jesus as the Messiah.¹⁸ Therefore, we can conclude that this friction between the Jewish and non-Jewish believers started long before these teachers from Jerusalem ever showed up.

We see that the Judaizers accused Paul of being big-headed. That involves having an inordinately high opinion of oneself; being arrogant or haughty. However, they were not with Paul on the road to Damascus; they did not see the vision he saw and did not hear the voice he heard. Yes, they accepted that he went from a flaming persecutor of the Church to a fiery preacher of the Gospel, but dismissed his claim of being appointed by God. Paul doesn’t spend time putting them down or calling them liars. He offered them the evidence, gave them the facts, and left it up to them whether to accept it or not. As long as God and Jesus knew who he was and that he was telling the truth, that was enough for Paul.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER ONE (Lesson X)

We learn from Jewish philosopher Philo (20 BC-50 AD) from Alexandria, Egypt, who adopted the Greek culture in place of his Jewish customs, that circumcision was already a hot topic in the Roman and Greek world. His discussions on circumcision, as the Jews clearly perceived it within their religion as a critical identity factor, may serve both to illustrate the tensions that existed in the early Church. This, no doubt, forced the debate that took place in Jerusalem with Paul there to defend his position that Gentiles converted to Christianity should not be forced to come in through the door after being circumcised.¹ After all, Jesus said that He was the door but never mentioned the requirement of circumcision to enter. In one of his writings, Philo acknowledges that the ordinance of circumcision is ridiculed among many people, although  it is an act which is practiced to a smaller degree among other nations, and most especially by the Egyptians, who appeared to him to be the most populous of all nations, and experts in all kinds of wisdom.

But Philo is puzzled that such an ancient custom continued in the spirit of advancement in wisdom and knowledge by Jews and other nations who practice this ritual. After all, this required that myriads of men must be circumcised in every generation, mutilating their bodies in a manner which is accompanied by severe discomfort. However, there are many reasons which might encourage men to persevere and continue a custom which was introduced by previous generations, and it would be most fitting for scholars to discard childish ridicule and investigate the real causes of this ordinance with more discretion and dignity so they might find the reasons why this custom still prevails. Furthermore, that they not be in a hurry in coming to a conclusion without a thorough examination of the facts and be laughed at for the results they present to the world. They must be persuaded to give such a study great weight and importance.

Philo then offers some suggestions that he thinks should be considered: First of all, it is a procedure which can control painful diseases which are difficult to cure. In Philo’s day one such disease was called a “carbuncle.”² The Greek word is anthrax, which also signifies a hot coal because when it becomes inflamed it burns. And this disease is very apt to be generated among those who have not undergone the rite of circumcision. It is highly possible that some would confuse a carbuncle with syphilis. Philo goes on to say that circumcision can secure the cleanliness of the whole body in a way that is suited to the people consecrated to God; with which the Egyptian priests, being extravagant in their case, shave the whole of their bodies believing that some of these evils which ought to be gotten rid of colonate in and lodge under the hair and the foreskin.³ This should give us some insight into why the Jews held the ordinance of circumcision in such high esteem, in addition to it identifying them as descendants of Abraham and children of the Covenant between him and God.

While no Christian church demands that its male members be circumcised before they can join, the rite of water baptism has surely replaced this Jewish ritual with a Christian ordinance or sacrament. And the same disregard and belittlement have been directed toward such baptism, especially the Protestant form of adult baptism. It is a symbol full of spiritual meaning, and one that Jesus our Christ made clear was to go along with preaching the Gospel to the whole world.⁴ But to demand it before accepting a person as a real Christian would take away the importance of willingness in the message of the angel Jesus sent in John’s revelation.⁵

1:4-5 I want to remind you, that in order for Jesus our Christ to set us free from the imprisonment of this wicked world He freely offered Himself to die for our sins. So I say that all glory and honor belongs to God the Father both now and throughout eternity. Amen.

Paul makes a striking statement that would have more effect on the Jewish converts than the Gentile believers in Galatia. These Judaizers were trying to add the value of all the Jewish “trying to be good” laws, ceremonies, feasts, customs and ideology to the work of Jesus our Christ. They felt it made our Christ’s work more worthwhile and effective. But Paul declares in no uncertain terms, that Jesus “chose to die on our behalf.” In the Jewish religion, all the lambs, sheep, goats, cattle, and birds that were force ably sacrificed, not voluntarily, when they were placed on the altar against their will.

When Paul wrote the Ephesians he put it this way, “Live with love as our Christ loved you. He gave Himself for us as a gift on the altar to God which was as a sweet aroma to God.”⁶ In writing to Timothy, Paul made it clear that our Christ gave Himself in exchange for those held by the chains of sin so they could go free.⁷ Then our Christ conquered sin so it could no longer have unbridled and unchallenged power over those whom our Christ set free. To Bishop Titus, Paul wrote: “He gave Himself for us. He did this by buying us with His blood and making us free from all sin. He gave Himself so His people could be clean and want to do good.”⁸

The writer of Hebrews emphasizes the same theme. He wrote that by paying the required price with His blood, our Christ’s sacrifice frees us from the worry of having to obey the old rules and makes us want to serve the living God out of love.⁹ And the Apostle Peter describes this exchange graphically by noting that our Christ took our sins and transferred them to His own body, and then went to the cross to suffer the penalty for our sin, which is death.¹⁰ By so doing, we then benefited from the wounds that He received for the spiritual healing of our own infected souls to make them whole and clean again. And the Apostle John takes it a step further by saying that the price our Christ paid to ransom us from sin’s bondage was not just for a few individuals but for the whole world.¹¹

When we compare what the Apostle John wrote in his Gospel in 3:16, and compare it to what he wrote in his first Epistle 3:16, we see a comparison. In John 3:16 the Apostle told us that our Christ gave His life for us and in 1 John 3:16 he tells us that we should be ready to give our lives for our spiritual brothers and sisters. What exactly does that mean? In my mind, it is another way of saying that any believer should be willing to defend their brothers and sisters even if it means their death. This has been done over the centuries in Rome’s Colosseum, Hitler’s concentration camps, Soviet Russia’s internment camps in Siberia, China’s prison camps, and in numerous other places. I wonder if it ever came to that in the USA, how many of us would gladly step forward?

When Paul talks about our being saved from this present wicked world, he was not talking just about our present salvation from the chains of wickedness that holds the world in bondage, but also according to His promise through Isaiah: “I will make new heavens and a new earth. The past things will not be remembered or come to mind.”¹² When it comes to living free in our present world Paul also explained it this way to the Romans,¹³ and defined it for the believers in Corinth,¹⁴ as well as the Ephesians.¹⁵ So this is not just something Paul thought up because he was upset with the Galatians for becoming so lukewarm in such a short period of time.

Other Bible writers were just as adamant about keeping ourselves from the impurities of the world. In fact, James accused those who did not guard themselves against the contamination of this world as being “a friend to the world and an enemy of God.”¹⁶ And the Apostle John went so far as to say that once a person falls in love with this world they fall out of love with God and His world.¹⁷ John says that all of this is unnecessary since the power of faith within us is greater than all the power of sin in the world.¹⁸

As far as our future salvation from this world in order to be with our Redeemer is concerned, the writer of Hebrews points out that God did not select angels to be leaders in the world-to-come, but that the reason our Christ came into the world was to lower Himself below the status of angels so that in the end He might elevate us to a level above the angels so that in heaven we could share in His shining brightness.¹⁹ The author goes on to say that anyone who disowns this and turns their back on such a great gift is nailing the Son of God to the cross again and again.²⁰ And the Apostle John let his readers know that we have been given the understanding to know that what we have now through our Christ is not only for this world but for the life that will last forever.²¹