Introductory remarks:
"Paul says he then went to the leaders of the Jerusalem church to be judged. They didn't ask that Titus be circumcised nor did they correct him and were convinced that he was sent by God to preach to the Gentiles. But when Peter was in Antioch he ate with the Gentiles until men came from James and he made a show of keeping to the Jews. He called Peter on his hypocrisy, asking why he would ask Gentiles to live by the law if we are not justified by works of the law but by faith. Being free from being judged by the law doesn't mean Christ promotes sinning. Since in Christ's death our sins were judged we live to God. Saying people must live by the law is saying Christ died for nothing" (A Survey of Galatians - by Brenda). This chapter may be outlined as follows: Paul accepted by the other apostle's vv. 1-10; Paul rebukes Peter at Antioch vv. 11-14; Jews, like Gentiles, are saved by faith vv. 15-21.
Paul Accepted by the Other Apostles
Verse 1, "Then for fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also."
LGT "Then after fourteen years I again went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking with [me] Titus:"
Then after fourteen years: Paul counts these years from his conversion, for his life before he puts away from his memory, so all his time he records from his conversion. Again I went up to Jerusalem: this visit is described in Acts 15, which describes the first council among the apostles. With Barnabas: Barnabas traveled with Paul on this occasion to answer the question among the elders and apostles gathered at Jerusalem, whether circumcision was necessary for salvation. Taking with me Titus: Titus was a Greek Christian. Titus was one of Paul's converts, and he was a case in point as far as Paul had not circumcised him.
McGee notes:
"You see, the Judaizers were going about saying that the church in Jerusalem held that all believers in Christ should be under the Mosaic Law. All of the men there at the Jerusalem church, which was an all-Jewish church, had certainly been under it. Most of them still went to the temple to worship. In fact, that must have been the Christian's meeting place. Paul and Barnabas came there to get the official word regarding law and grace."
Verse 2, "And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain."
LGT "But I went up according to revelation: and laid before them the Glad Tidings which I preached among the Gentiles, but privately to those of repute, Lest somehow in vain I should be running or had run."
But I went up according to revelation: Paul went up to Jerusalem not by the suggestion of men, but by divine revelation; and the church in Antioch were in full agreement. And laid before them the Glad Tidings, which I preached among the Gentiles: he laid before the Christians in Jerusalem the same gospel of grace he preached among the Gentiles. Paul preached first to the Christians in Jerusalem without consent from the other apostles; he preached the gospel of grace that was without any reference to the Law of Moses. But privately to those of repute: after preaching the gospel of grace publicly, he met with the elders and apostles privately and laid before them the same gospel of grace. Lest somehow in vain I should be running or had run: many of the converts in Jerusalem were converted from Judaism, and so Paul had to set them right on the gospel of free grace. It would not have faired well if he had brought these things to light in public. Paul lets them know that the gospel of grace was given by direct revelation. He did not go to them in order to have the other apostles put their seal of approval on the gospel given him, but he set it before them in order that they would examine it and settle for themselves whether or not Paul's preaching had been in vain.
Verse 3, "But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised."
LGT "But not even Titus, who [was] with me, although he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised."
But not even Titus: it was very bold of Paul to take Titus, a Greek, with him to Jerusalem. The word "Greek" means that Titus was from heathen extraction. Was compelled to be circumcised: the Greek word for "compelled" means to force. "That is, no constraint by the Jerusalem church and its authorities for the circumcision of Titus. The statement is not that such an attempt was pressed but successfully resisted, but that circumcision was not insisted on by the church. The pressure in that direction came from 'the false brethren' described in the next verse" (Vincent).
Verse 4, "And because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage."
LGT "Now it was on account of the false brethren craftily introduced, who came in by sneakiness to spy out our freedom, which we have in Christ Jesus, in order that they might bring us into bondage:"
Now it was on account of false brethren: these "false brethren" were the Judaizers, the anti-Paulinist. These were Christians in name only. Paul says it was because of these "false brethren" that he did not have Titus circumcised. Circumcision in itself is not wrong, only the motives. If a person is circumcised because they feel they cannot be saved without this ritual, they are dead wrong. Craftily introduced: these false brethren came under the pretense of being true believers. Who came in by sneakiness to spy out our freedom: "The liberty referred to in this clause is not spiritual liberty in general, nor independence of human authority, but freedom in the sphere where it is menaced and threatened to be curtailed. It was freedom from the Mosaic ritual, but not by itself; for that freedom contained in it at the same time justification by faith without deeds of law. This liberty is precious" (John Eadie). Which we have in Christ Jesus: this liberty was secured by Christ, and it is in Christ that we possess this liberty. In order that they might bring us into bondage: these spies thought they could catch Paul teaching two different things; when he was out preaching among the Gentiles, they said he taught that it was not necessary to keep the law; but when he came to Jerusalem he taught that it was necessary to keep the law. It was because of this that Paul did not have Titus circumcised, and he refused to succumb to the false teaching that the law was not fulfilled in Christ Jesus. Paul's gospel of grace was always "faith alone in Christ alone."
Verse 5, "To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you."
LGT "To whom not even for an hour did we yield in subjection, in order that the truth of the Glad Tidings might continue with you:"
To whom not even for an hour did we yield in subjection: Paul says that they did not waver in submitting to the false views of these false brethren. In order that the truth of the Glad tidings: all of the gospel of grace is true of course, but here we have the article before "truth", so it means the particular truth of not mixing law and grace. Paul did not submit to having Titus circumcised, because if he did, he would have compromised away the truth of grace. "It was a grave crisis to call for such language. The whole problem of Gentile Christianity was involved in the case of Titus, whether Christianity was to be merely a modified brand of legalistic Judaism or a spiritual religion, the true Judaism (the children of Abraham by faith). The case of Timothy (whom Paul had circumcised) was utterly different for he had a Jewish mother and a Greek father. Titus was pure Greek" (Robertson). Might continue with you: Paul wanted Christians to have the benefit of the pure Gospel of grace to continue in their lives, without the cumbersome effect of burdening themselves with the yoke of bondage of the law. Until we learn the full truth of the grace of God made available to us through Jesus Christ, we will never truly appreciate its benefits, and we cannot learn these benefits of His grace outside the Word of God.
Verse 6, "But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me."
LGT "But from the ones who were reputed to be something, whatsoever they were, makes no difference to me: the person of [the] man God does not accept: for to me, the ones of repute presented nothing to me."
But from the ones who were reputed to be something: Paul refers here to the big three, Cephas, James and John. Paul does not intend any disrespect regarding these apostles; he simply says that those apostles of high reputation, and he is stating here his apostolic independence. Whatsoever they were: whatsoever they once were. Makes no difference to me: "Paul seems to say that whatever was their rank and standing, it did not in the least affect his authority as an apostle, or his argument. While he rejoiced in their concurrence, and while he sought their approbation, yet he did not admit for a moment that he was inferior to them as an apostle, or dependent on them for the justness of his views. . . .He had derived his gospel from the Lord Jesus; and he had the fullest assurance that his views were just. Paul makes this remark evidently in keeping with all that he had said, that he did not regard himself as in any manner dependent on them for his authority. He did not treat them with disrespect; but he did not regard them as having a right to claim authority over him" (Barnes). The person of [the] man God does not accept: this is the precise reason he said what he said above. No one apostle had authority to outrank another apostle, for God is not impressed with the person of man. Whatever is righteous in man is put there by the Lord through imputation.
Calvin notes on this phrase:
"Paul is not discussing the real worth of the apostles, but the idle boasting of his adversaries. In order to support their own unfounded pretensions, they talked in lofty terms of Peter, James, and John, and took advantage of the veneration [adoration] with which they were regarded by the church, for accomplishing their earnest desire of degrading Paul. His object is not to inquire what the apostles are, or what opinion must be formed respecting them when controversy is laid aside, but to tear off the disguise, which the false apostles wore. As in a subsequent part of the Epistle he treats of circumcision, not in its real character, but in the false and impious notion attached to it by those impostors, so he now declares that the apostles were in the sight of God disguises, by which those persons attempted to shine in the world; and this is evident from the words. Why did they prefer them to Paul? Because they were his predecessors in office. [They sought for authority] This was a mere disguise. In any other point of view, they would have been highly esteemed, and the gifts of God manifested in them would have been warmly admired by one so singularly modest as the apostle Paul, who elsewhere acknowledges that he was 'the least of the apostles,' and unworthy to occupy so exalted a station. I am the least of the apostles, and not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the Church of God (1 Cor. 15:9)."
For to me, the ones of repute presented nothing to me: Paul says, in our conference, they did not change anything about the gospel I presented to them; in other words, they agreed with me. Vincent says, "They imposed no obligations in their own interest as Jewish Christians." "They not only gave me no instructions, as if my course had been disapproved by them, but on the contrary, their conduct was the very opposite; neither jealousy, nor disparagement of me - far from it, - but on the contrary, they gave me the right hand of fellowship" (John Eadie).
Verse 7, "But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter."
LGT "But on the contrary, having seen that I have been entrusted with the Glad Tidings to the uncircumcision, just as Peter that of the circumcision."
But on the contrary: when the apostles in Jerusalem saw what Paul and Barnabas had accomplished they agreed with them and gave them the right hand of fellowship (vs. 9). Having seen that I have been entrusted with the glad Tidings to the uncircumcision: They realized that Paul had been given the commission by Jesus Christ to take the gospel of grace to the Gentiles. Just as Peter that of the circumcision: Peter was the leading apostle to the Jews. It is not to be understood that there was two gospels, but that Paul was to preach the gospel of free grace to the Gentiles, and Peter was to preach the same gospel of free grace to the Jews.
Verse 8, "(For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles.)"
LGT "For He who wrought in Peter for apostleship of the circumcision, wrought also in me towards the Gentiles:"
For He who wrought in Peter for apostleship of the circumcision: the same God, who called Peter to preach the gospel of grace to the Jews, wrought also in me towards the Gentiles: Paul was in complete agreement with Peter, and Peter was in complete agreement with Paul. Here is an interesting quote from Calvin: "But if Peter's apostleship had a peculiar reference to the Jews, let the Romanists see on what ground they derive from him their succession to the primacy. If the Pope of Rome claims the primacy because he is Peter's successor, he ought to exercise it over the Jews. Paul is here declared to be the chief apostle to the Gentiles, yet they affirm that he was not the bishop of Rome; and, therefore, if the Pope would establish any claim to his primacy, let him gather churches from among the Jews." Eadie notes: "The Inworker is God, and that inworking comprehends every element of commission and qualification - outpouring of the Spirit, working of miracles, and all the various endowments and adaptations which fitted both men so fully for their respective spheres."
Verse 9, "And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision."
LGT "And having known the grace which was given to me, James and Cephas and John, those reputed to be the pillars, they gave to me and Barnabas [the] right hands of fellowship, that we [should go] to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcision:"
And having known the grace which was given to me: this grace included the gospel of grace Paul was preaching to the Gentiles; Paul always speaks of grace as a free gift. The pillars of the church received Paul and Barnabas and the gospel they were preaching without adding anything to it. James, Cephas and John, those reputed to be pillars: these were the pillar apostles, that is, they had the reputation as being the pillars. "The metaphor [figure of speech] of pillars, applied to the great representatives and supporters of an institution, is old, and common in all languages" (Vincent). They gave me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship: this giving of the right hand of fellowship means that these reputed pillars were partnering with Paul and Barnabas in complete agreement. That we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcision: another interesting note on this fellowship, also meaning, partnership, is that all converts to the Lord Jesus Christ, whether Jew or Greek, are joined to one great united Christian Church, which is the invisible Body of Christ. So Paul, and Barnabas, and the big three were all one hundred percent untied on the issue of free grace.
Verse 10, "Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do."
LGT "Only that we should keep on remembering the poor, which very thing I was diligent to do."
Only that we should keep on remembering the poor: the poor of course are the poor Christians. Which very thing I was diligent to do: Paul taking up a collection among the Galatians and taking it to the poor believers in Jerusalem proves this out.
Matthew Poole notes:
"These pillars and apostles, which have among you the greatest reputation, added no new doctrine to us, gave us nothing new in charge; they only desired us that we would be careful, wheresoever we went, to make collection for the poor Christians in Judea, who either by selling all they had to maintain the gospel in its first plantation, or by the sharp persecution which had wasted them, or by reason of the famine, were very low; nor was this any new thing, I had before done it, and was very forward to do it again, had they said nothing to us about it."
Paul Rebukes Peter at Antioch
Verse 11, "But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed."
LGT "But when Cephas came to Antioch, I withstood him to [the] face, because he was to be condemned."
But when Cephas came to Antioch: Paul passes now to another argument. Peter seems to have followed Paul and Barnabas down to Antioch. I withstood him to the face: this phrase literally means that "Paul faced him down." Paul did not go behind Peter's back and start rumors about him; he came publicly and faced him down. Because he was to be condemned: Paul had to openly condemn Peter because what he had done was leading Christians away from the gospel of grace into legalism. Peter's actions condemned him, and Paul brought it out to the Church. The Roman Catholic Church, under the teaching of Chrysostom and Jerome taught that Paul and Peter staged this debate, and that it was not a rebuke of Paul to Peter, in order to preserve their fallacy of Peter being the first Pope. Another false teaching was that this "Cephas" was not the same as Peter. As we continue our study we shall see that these false theories are not only trivial, but also childish.
Verse 12, "For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision."
LGT "For before that some came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles: but when they came he was drawing back and separating himself, being afraid of those of the circumcision."
For before that some came from James: the Jewish believers in the Jerusalem church continued the practice of keeping the law. It would take several years before they were convinced of their liberty in Christ. Certain of these Jews came from the Jerusalem church, for James was the bishop there, and they would watch the actions of Peter among the Gentile believers at Antioch. He was eating with Gentiles: the A.V. misses the imperfect was eating; it was Peter's habit of eating with them after his rebuke at Cornelius' house of not calling unclean what God calls clean. Peter not only ate with Gentiles at the church meals, but he also ate with them in between. But when they came he was drawing back and separating himself: Peter began to act like a Pharisee, being afraid of what James might think of him. The word drawing back means to shrink back. Peter began to shrink back and separate himself from the Gentiles. At first Peter began withdrawing himself from the Gentiles, and then he completely separated himself from them. Being afraid of those of the circumcision: Peter, being the apostle to the Jews, feared that these Jewish converts might give a bad report back at Jerusalem, and that his authority might be challenged. Peter was the first to accept his liberty, and the first to waffle back and become Pharisaic.
Verse 13, "And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation."
LGT "And also the rest of [the] Jews conjointly dissembled themselves with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy."
And also the rest of the Jews: the Jews that had been converted to Christianity. Conjointly dissembled themselves with him: these Jews had followed Peter's example and had eaten with the Gentiles, and now they were going back to the legalistic scruples, which they did not sincerely believe. These Jews were trying to conceal from the other Jews who had come down from Jerusalem that they were eating with Gentiles. These Jews, along with Peter were playing the part of hypocrites, for they knew well and good that they were at liberty to eat whatever the Gentiles eat; now they were playing as if their salvation depended on their conformity to the law. So that even Barnabas also was carried away by their hypocrisy: "their act was hypocrisy, because it was a concealment of their own more liberal conviction, and an open profession of still adhering to the narrow Pharisaic view. A Practical denial of their better spiritual insight" (Vincent).
John Eadie notes:
"Even the apostle's colleague was swept away from his side by the influence of Peter, and perhaps by a similar awe of the other Jews [the ones from Jerusalem]. If Peter and Barnabas had changed their views, hypocrisy could not have been laid to their charge. But with their opinions unchanged, they acted as if they had been changed; therefore are they accused of dissimulation. It was 'not indecision' of opinion, as Jowett affirms, but indecision certainly in acting up to their unaltered convictions. Nor was it error or inconsistency, indeed by want of clear apprehension, that is laid to their charge; but downright hypocrisy, and that is the proper term to describe their conduct. What Peter could say in his genuine state may be read in his first Epistle, 1:22, 23. This dissimulation, so wide and powerful, was compromising the freedom of the gospel, for it was subverting the doctrine of justification by faith; and therefore the apostle, who could on fitting occasion 'to the Jews become a Jew,' was obliged to visit it with immediate and stern rebuke."
Verse 14, "But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?"
LGT "But when I saw that they are not walking straight according to the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before all, if being a Jew nation like, and live not Jewishly, how do you compel the Gentiles to Judaise."
But when I saw that they are not walking straight: walking in Scripture refers to their conduct. Paul says that he saw that Peter and Barnabas were not conducting themselves correctly. According to the truth of the gospel: they were not conducting themselves by the principles of the gospel of grace, mainly, justification by faith alone in Christ alone. I said to Cephas before all: Paul faced Peter down before the church. Because Peter was being a hypocrite before the church, it was before the church that Paul had to face Peter. If being a Jew nation like: that is, a Jew by birth. And live not Jewishly: Peter was eating and drinking with the Gentile converts until the present time when Jews came from Jerusalem. How do you compel the Gentiles to Judaise: "Really Paul charges Peter with trying to compel the Gentiles to live like Jews, to Judaise the Gentile Christians, the very point at issue in the Jerusalem Conference when Peter so loyally supported Paul. It was a bold thrust that allowed no reply. But Paul won Peter back and Barnabas also" (Robertson). Calvin adds: "Next, it is argued, that, in a harsh and violent manner, he [Peter] compelled the Gentiles, by withdrawing from their communion, unless they chose to submit to the yoke of the law; and thus imposed on them an unjust condition. And, indeed, the whole force of the reproof lies in this word, which neither Chrysostom nor Jerome [two of the Roman Catholic Churches main commentators of ancient history - Jerome being the author of the Latin Vulgate Version of the Bible which the Catholic Church uses] has remarked. The use of ceremonies was free for the purpose of edification, provided that believers were not deprived of their liberty, or laid under any restraint from which the gospel sets them free."
Jews, like Gentiles, are Saved by Faith
Verse 15, "We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles."
LGT "We are Jews by nature, and not of the Gentiles, sinners."
We are Jews by nature: You, Peter, and I are born Jews. And not of the Gentiles, sinners: all Jews looked down at the Gentiles as heathen sinners. The Jews had access to the Law that compelled them to Christ, while the Gentiles had no such privilege. Eadie notes: "Though we are Jews by descent, and not Gentiles who as such are regarded by us from our elevation as sinners, yet our Judaism, with all its boasted superiority, could not bring justification. Born and bred Jews as we are, we were obliged to renounce our trust in Judaism, for it was powerless to justify us. Why then go back to it, and be governed by it, as if we had not abandoned it at all?"
Verse 16, "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."
LGT "But knowing that a man is not justified by works of law, except by faith of Jesus Christ, we also believed into Christ Jesus, in order that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by works of law, because by works no flesh shall be justified."
But knowing that a man is not justified by works of law: man cannot be declared righteous before God by any works of the law. Except by faith of Jesus Christ: Paul is dealing with those Jews that were teaching that the Gentiles had to become Jews in order to be saved; now Paul is setting the record straight by saying, even we Jews had to believe in Christ by faith. Paul had experienced both sides of this question in that he was once a Pharisees of a Pharisee, and then when taught by Christ Himself, accepted Him by faith. It is not the faith that we have that justifies us; it is in Whom we place that faith, for it is Christ that imputes His righteousness on us who have believed. We also believed into Christ Jesus: "we too, born under the law, renounced all trust in the works of the law, and putting ourselves quite on a level with Gentile sinners who never had the law, - we as well as they believed into Christ Jesus" (Eadie). In order that we might be justified by the faith of Christ: Paul says that even He and Peter, who were once under the law, are now justified by the faith of Christ. This phrase is the result of their placing their trust in Christ as their own personal Savior. And not by works of law: we once believed in Messiah that was to come, but now we believe in the Christ who did come and imputed on us His righteousness. Because by works no flesh shall be justified: this is completely opposite in what the Roman Church teaches: they teach that by faith in Christ we are enabled to keep the law and therefore be justified before God; this is so far from Paul's meaning that he adds this last phrase that sets grace apart from works; no man is justified by any works whatsoever, regardless of the pious nature of the works. We could spend so much time here on this fact that we would not be able to finish this Epistle, and heaven knows I don't have that much time. We will leave Paul explain the rest of the story.
Verse 17, "But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid."
LGT "But if seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves were found also sinners, [is] then Christ a minister of sin? May it never be."
But if seeking to be justified in Christ: the emphasis is on "in Christ", that is, we are justified by the faith of Christ. We ourselves were found also to be sinners: you and I Peter, being good little Jews, were declared to be sinners just as the Gentiles, and that we were not justified by the law; is then Christ a minister of sin: Paul takes an assumption and reduces it to an absurdity. The sense is this: since the Jew, who thought he was free from sin, had to forsake his self righteousness by keeping the law, and take his place among the Gentile sinners, is Christ then the author of sin; Paul's answer is: May it never be: "may it be flung from as far as an abominable thing".
Vincent notes:
"Paul assumes that this was actually the case: that, seeking to be justified in Christ, they were found to be sinners. To seek to be justified by Christ is an admission that there is no justification by works; that the seeker is unjustified, and therefore a sinner. The effort to attain justification by faith in Christ develops the consciousness of sin. It compels the seeker, whether Jew or Gentile, to put himself upon the common plane of sinners. The Jew who calls the Gentile a sinner, in seeking to be justified by faith, finds himself a sinner also. The law has failed him as a justifying agency. But Paul is careful to repudiate the false inference from this fact, stated in what immediately follows, namely, that Christ is a minister of sin, that is, a Promoter of sin by causing us to abandon the law."
Verse 18, "For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor."
LGT "For if what I throw down these things again I build, I constitute myself a transgressor."
Peter, by his contradictory actions, that is, when he lived like a Gentile, he tore down the ceremonial law, and when he lived as a Jew, he tore down Salvation by Grace. Paul declares here that we are free from the condemnation of the law.
Verse 19, "For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God."
LGT "For I through law died to law, in order that to God I may live."
For I through law died to law: Paul is speaking of his own personal experience by accepting the gospel of grace; he forever was delivered from being under the law as a means of justification. Paul did not die to the law that he might live lawless, but: in order that to God I may live: with death to the law, a new principle of life entered. Now that we have the gospel of grace we no longer have to put ourselves under spiritual bondage of the law; we now have the freedom to serve God because we are in union with the Lord Jesus Christ.
Eadie notes on this last phrase:
"To live to God is to be in Him - in union with Him, and to feel the assimilating influence of this divine fellowship - to give Him the first place in the soul, and to put all its powers at His sovereign disposal - to consult Him in everything, and to be ever guided by His counsel - to do His will, because it is His will, at all times - to regard every step in its bearing on His claims and service, and to further His glory as the one grand end of our lives. Such is the ideal in its holy and grand end of our lives. Such is the ideal in its holy and blessed fullness. Alas, how seldom can it be realized! Such a life must be preceded by this death to the law through the law, for the legal spirit is one of bondage, failure, and unhappiness, - works done in obedience to law to ward off its penalty, with the consciousness that all the while the perfect fulfillment of the law is impossible, - God being viewed as the lawgiver and judge in their sterner aspects, and not in His grace, so as to win our confidence and our unreserved consecration. This clause is connected with the one before it, and not with the following one."
Verse 20, "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."
LGT "I have been crucified with Christ: yet I live, no longer I, but Christ lives in me: but that which I now live in flesh, in faith I live, that of the Son of God, the one who loved me and gave Himself for me."
I have been crucified with Christ: this phrase in the Greek is a perfect passive I have been, meaning that it happened once for all. Paul is addressing Peter saying that all believers in Christ have been crucified with Him positionally. Paul says that our union with Christ is our identifying with Him in His crucifixion. Christ died on the cross putting an end to the curse of the law, and thus by our union with Him in His death we are also dead to the law; if a man hangs on to the law without Christ, he will be damned by the law. We are in union with Christ simply by faith alone in Christ alone, and then we are immediately placed into union with Christ, and we are also crucified with Him, raised with Him, and seated in the heavenlies at the right hand of the Father; this does not happen when we die; this happens the moment we believed in Christ. "Being then crucified with Him, we are freed from all the curse and guilt of the law. He who endeavors to set aside that deliverance makes void the cross of Christ. But let us remember, that we are delivered from the yoke of the law, only by becoming one with Christ, as the twig draws its sap from the root, only by growing into one nature" (Calvin). Yet I live, no longer I: the fact that Paul says yet I live, shows that he did not mean that he was crucified literally, but only positionally. The phrase no longer I prove that he was no longer seeking God through the law by his own effort. But Christ lives in me: Christ has taken up residence in the life of every believer; He has given us His Holy Word as our foundation and living guide; He has also given us the Holy Spirit in our lives, and now He wants to live through us, and He will, if we are willing to submit to Him and follow Bible doctrine daily. But that which I now live in the flesh: this human existence we all face. In faith I live: Paul says that he lived in faith not by faith; this means that his life was sustained completely by the faith of Christ. That of the Son of God: the Son of God not only gives eternal life, he also sustains all believers by His faith. All that is required of us is that we submit to His will and we will be used by Him. The One who loved me and gave Himself for me: Jesus Christ gave Himself as a perfect sin offering on the cross, and because of this we are eternally saved, and He is able to impute on every one of us His perfect righteousness. Christ not only saved us by His grace, He sustains us by His grace; we heap trouble on ourselves when we forget this incredible fact of grace, and try to handle the situations of life by our own works.
Verse 21, "I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain."
LGT "I do not cast off the grace of God: for if through law righteousness [is], then Christ died for nought."
I do not cast off the grace of God: Paul knew that the one saving element in justification was free grace; he felt that faith alone in the grace of God was all that the gospel of grace was about, and that Peter was setting aside grace by interjecting the law back into justification. For if through the law righteousness is: righteousness is that by which man becomes right before God, and if man can become right before God by the works of the law: then Christ died for nought: "But if righteousness did come by the law, then there was no necessity for Christ's death. If man by works of law can justify himself, what need was there that Christ should die to provide for him what he can win for himself? The sense is not, if works are necessary, Christ's death is ineffectual or in vain; but, if works can secure righteousness, Christ's death was needless" (Eadie). You see, it is one thing to believe that you are pleasing God by your works, but entirely another to believe that by your works you may secure your justification. The point being, that a believer may believe he is pleasing God, even though he is mistaken, by his works; but a believer could never believe that he is justifying himself before God. Paul will continue this doctrine of justification by the grace of Christ in the next chapter.
Share freely but cite the source: http://bbbiblehelps.epizy.com