AFFIRMING THE GOSPEL MESSAGE

GALATIANS 2:1-10

MARCH 1, 1998

 

How sensitive are you to the truth of the gospel?  Paul faced the daunting task of calling the attention of the entire church to the infectious teaching that was undermining gospel preaching.  He knew clearly where he stood on the gospel, for he had received it by "a revelation of Jesus Christ."  His concern was for the balance of the church, as to whether or not they were falling prey to the influence of the law-minded Judaizers.

 

The essence of this matter has been captured by Dr. Timothy George in his commentary on Galatians.

The price of theological integrity and spiritual vitality, like that of liberty, is eternal vigilance.  The gates of hell will never prevail against Christ's church, nor will the truth of the gospel ever be so obscured that God is left without a witness on the earth.  However, throughout the history of the church there are discernible periods of apostasy and decline and examples of many visible congregations whose candlestick has been removed by the living Lord because of their infidelity to him [NAC, Galatians, 152].

We can be no less vigilant. For the same gospel which Paul, Peter, and John preached is at stake with each generation.  At issue in the gospel are the souls of men and the life of the church. We must be unwavering in the message of the gospel.  Why is this so important for us?

 

I.  Unity in the gospel  vv. 1-3

 

At the heart of what Paul was undertaking in his visit to Jerusalem was the unity of the gospel in the early church.  He understood that these first century disciples of Christ could not be divided on their understanding and proclamation of the gospel.  So Paul made a quiet visit to Jerusalem, one in which he did not seek to have a public audience with the church-at-large.  Instead, he desired to talk with the principle spokesmen for the church in order to compare views on the gospel and its ability to save sinners.

 

We need to consider the historical setting for Paul's visit to Jerusalem.  Bible students are divided over the timing of the incident described in our text. It is a choice between whether its roots are in Acts 11:27-30 in which Paul and Barnabas were sent by the church in Antioch with an offering for the Jerusalem church, or whether it referred to the Acts 15 Jerusalem Council.  Without going into all of the arguments for either position, I am of the opinion that what Paul is describing in Galatians 2 was the summation of his visit mentioned in Acts 11:27-30.  Let me enumerate a few of the reasons for this interpretation.

 

First, the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) was a public meeting of the apostles and elders, then later with the entire Jerusalem church.  Paul states that his meeting was instead "in private to those who were of reputation," referring to Peter, James, and John.  No public meeting was mentioned.

 

Second, the fruit of the Acts 15 Jerusalem Council was an official letter from the apostles, elders and brethren in Jerusalem which stated clearly the apostolic position against the necessity of circumcision or works of the law for salvation.  In Galatians, Paul does not refer to this letter at all, which would have been a conclusive evidence that his opponents, the Judaizers, were out of sync with the apostolic gospel.  It would have crushed the weight of the Judaizers' arguments against Paul.  Calvin comments, "While his opponents were falsely claiming the support of the apostles and doing their utmost to harass Paul, how careless he would have been to pass over the decree circulated among them all which undermined their position" [quoted by L. Morris, Galatians, 65].

 

Third, there is no mention of a meeting with the apostles and elders, along with the Jerusalem church in the Galatians narrative.  That would have added to Paul's support since the Jerusalem Council was an open meeting and the Judaizers were claiming the support of "headquarters."

 

Finally, Paul indicates that he went up to Jerusalem to deal with the gospel message "because of a revelation," rather than by the appointment of the Antioch church to deal with the Judaizer problem (Acts 15:2).  Surely, if he had in mind the Acts 15 Jerusalem Council, he could have added that he had the backing of the church at Antioch in approaching the Jerusalem church with the problem of the legalistic teaching.

 

I go into detail on this because it shows us how serious-minded the early disciples were about the contents of the gospel message.  If Paul went to the trouble of traveling to Jerusalem to privately discuss the gospel, then traveled another time, probably 2-3 years later, in an official capacity on behalf of the Gentile church, then we see that the first century church was embroiled in great controversy early-on.  The Church made up of Gentiles and Jews could not be divided on the issue of the gospel.  For it is only one gospel that saves all who come in faith to Jesus Christ.

 

1.  Gospel's far-reaching power

 

At the heart of the Galatian controversy was the teaching that faith alone in Christ alone was not sufficient for salvation.  A Gentile convert must also be circumcised in order to be saved.  The Judaizers obviously claimed that this was the authoritative gospel taught in Jerusalem.  So just in case there was a question mark about the power of the gospel to save those who were not circumcised, Paul took Titus along with him to Jerusalem.  "Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also....but not even Titus who was with me, though he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised."

 

Teaching circumcision for salvation was not really an issue among Jewish converts because they were already circumcised.  But now this addition of Gentile converts created a problem with those Jews who had superficially embraced the gospel.  They still clung to their circumcision and obedience to the ceremonial law as part of their righteousness before God.  Shortly, Paul explains that being "Jews by nature" meant that circumcision was part of the national heritage (2:15).  It was a sign of their covenant relationship with God initiated with Abraham.  Over time, the Jews became over-reliant upon circumcision and the sacrificial system to the neglect of weightier matters.  They had faced persecution and even death for practicing circumcision during the reign of the brutal Antiochus IV (175-163 BC).  For the price paid, the practice of circumcision was elevated in the eyes of the Jews.  It was considered an indispensable part of their identity with the covenant community and the worship of the Lord God [cf. George, 142-145 for excellent treatment on circumcision].

 

Now Paul was teaching that circumcision was of no value (Gal. 6:15) for righteousness.  "A man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus," he taught (2:16).  So the Judaizers reacted.  But Paul stood firm.  As positive proof that the gospel has the power to save an uncircumcised Greek, he took Titus with him to Jerusalem.  He would be a 'test-case' to verify that the Jerusalem church had no qualms with the gospel which Paul preached.  Indeed, Titus represents countless millions who have given the same evidence that it is not some external act of ceremony which saves a sinner.  But it is the righteousness of Jesus Christ alone, a righteousness received by faith alone that saves.  It also affirms that whether Jew or Greek in background, the power of the gospel unites us into one new man in Christ.  The Judaizers sought to divide Jewish and Gentile Christians, but Paul affirms that the gospel does not divide Christians; it only unites.  "For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one, and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross" (Eph. 2:14-16).  It is the power of the atoning death of Christ that saved a pagan-minded man like Titus.  This same gospel power extends to the far-reaches of the world to save people from "every tribe and tongue and people and nation" (Rev. 5:9), uniting us as one in Jesus Christ.

 

2.  Gospel capable of examination

 

The gospel is something which we can state in propositions.  It is not simply a religious feeling or a subjective exercise devoid of rational content or a religious decision without theological basis.  The whole New Testament is a record of the message of the gospel of Jesus Christ.  Throughout the Old Testament as well, we have remarkable "gospel passages."  Paul stated that he went up to Jerusalem "and I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles."  To make such a submission implies that Paul laid the gospel before them for their consideration.  It may have been that he had capsuled his gospel in writing and presented it to them.  But more than likely, he outlined verbally to the key apostles the contents of the gospel which he preached.

 

I do not think we should get the idea that Paul went in with fear and trembling.  He was quite confident in the gospel which he preached, for he "received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ."  Paul was not concerned about his gospel preaching as much as he was concerned about what was being preached in Jerusalem!  He wanted to make sure that they were "running" together in gospel proclamation.  He viewed their task as a race in which they were moving forward in declaring the message of the Kingdom.

 

The message of the gospel centers on what God has done in Jesus Christ to deliver sinners from the justice of divine wrath.  It points to a holy, sovereign God and sinful, depraved humanity that exists completely at enmity with God.  Then God came to man in the Incarnation.  He took on humanity, fulfilled the Law on behalf of sinners so that sinners might receive the imputation of His righteousness for their standing with God.  And more so, Jesus Christ satisfied all of the righteous demands of God toward sinners, bearing His own wrath in His body upon the cross, so that the enmity between us and God might be removed; that we might be reconciled to God, being made heirs forever.  He rose from the dead and unites us with Him in resurrection power, with the promise that one day we will be raised eternally with Him.  We receive all that Christ accomplished through faith alone in Him and His finished work.  Nothing can be added to this, nor is anything necessary, for Jesus Christ finished all that God demanded for our eternal salvation.  Neither circumcision, nor baptism, nor church membership, nor observance of the sacraments, nor adherence to the Law can add one drop of righteousness to our standing with God.  For in Jesus Christ, our standing is complete!  Through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone we are justified before God.

 

We can disagree about many things within the local church and within the broader scope of Christian churches.  But we have no room to disagree on the gospel.  That was the essence of what Paul was addressing in Jerusalem.  There are plenty of wonderful brethren with whom we cannot dot the same 'i's' and cross the same 't's' on non-essential areas of teaching.  But we stand together on the gospel!

 

My great concern is for those who call themselves evangelical Christians and gospel preachers, yet they convolute the gospel of Jesus Christ.  When they substitute some outward movement for faith in Jesus Christ and His atoning death, then they convolute the gospel.  When they claim that praying a particular prayer will save you, they have failed to leave a person with the sufficiency of the cross of Christ to remove our enmity with God.  When they claim that your trip down a church aisle at their beckoning is what you need to do to be saved, then they have detracted from the sufficiency of the gospel and its power to save.

 

When we examine the methods that have confused the message of the gospel in our day, we find much of what professes to be the gospel lacking the very gospel it professes!  Let us not hesitate to examine the message we speak or hear, lest the cross of Christ and the necessity of faith alone be pushed aside for showy manipulation of carnal minds.

 

3.  Gospel unifies churches

 

Paul had no intention of changing his gospel preaching.  He had received it by revelation and had it confirmed over and over as to its validity.  His concern was that his brethren in Jerusalem might be "fudging" a bit on some of the essential elements of the gospel.  So he "submitted to them the gospel" which he preached "for fear that I might be running or had run, in vain."  What Paul meant was not that he had failed to understand the gospel or had possibly preached the wrong gospel.  But instead, in the joint race of gospel ministry, he might have found himself alone, with all of the others getting side-tracked by changing the gospel message.  He might have found his fruit, the Galatian converts and others, being led away by the Judaizers for a false gospel.  If the heart of the early church, the Jerusalem Christians, could not support his gospel preaching, then the Judaizers would have just what they needed to divert these young converts into their false teaching.  So Paul submits the gospel to the leading apostles for their evaluation and for their confirmation, so that they might be running together in the unity of the gospel.

 

I think this is perhaps one of the most important matters we can consider at this time in Christianity.  For there are many things that seem to unite churches, at least on the surface, but often it is not the right thing.  Many churches are united because of some organizational structure or an adherence to a collective set of governing rules.  Others are joined together because of a common denominational tag, e.g., Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist.  But what Paul is showing us is that ultimately, it is the gospel alone that can unite us in actual practice.  We can have the same organizational structure and same church government, but have no essential unity.  There are plenty of Baptists that function the same organizationally, but do not believe the Scriptures nor do they proclaim the gospel.  We may have the same tag with them but we do not have unity with them apart from the gospel.

 

This is why it is a futile effort on the part of some evangelicals to be united with the Roman Catholic Church.  A number of leading evangelicals persist in trying to find some common ground for unity with Catholics.  But unless we can agree on the gospel, we have no ground for unity.  John Armstrong put it like this: 

The problem is not that there are no true believers within the Roman Catholic Church. That has never been the debate. God is the final judge of who, whether Roman Catholic or evangelical, is genuinely trusting Christ alone for salvation.  The problem is that those who affirm the theological beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church do not have a gospel that is biblical.  We must share the gospel with lost evangelicals but we must make sure it is the gospel that we are preaching to them, not the gospel of Rome, which is no gospel at all [Viewpoint, Jan.-Feb., 1998, vol. 2, no. 1, 8].

 

II. Opposition to the gospel  vv. 4-5

 

Paul was well-received in Jerusalem, as was the uncircumcised Titus.  He feels compelled to explain to the Galatians exactly why he felt it necessary to make such a bold venture before those of reputation in the church.  It was to stand for the truth of the gospel in the face of those who were in opposition to it.

 

1.  Character of opposition

 

Paul uses "cloak and dagger" language to describe those who opposed the gospel.  "But it was because of the false brethren who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage."  The NIV describes these "false brethren" as those who "infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus."  The picture is just what you might expect.

 

A group of Jews claimed to profess faith in Jesus Christ.  Consequently, they gained access to the church through a congregation, possibly one in Judea.  Since they were now part of the church, they could easily maneuver from one church to another, staking their claim for understanding the gospel.  Paul objects to this!  He calls them "false brethren," which shows that he had absolutely no confidence in their profession of faith.  Paul was not one to be cruel to weak brethren.  He counseled the Roman believers to be conscious of "weaker brethren" (Rom. 14).  He also freely called the professing Christians in the troubled church at Corinth, "brethren" and "saints."  So why does he call these people "false brethren"?  I believe it is because they steadfastly held to the insistence of circumcision just as much as Paul held steadfastly to faith alone in Jesus Christ.  Paul saw through their smooth language to understand that they truly believed that faith alone in Jesus Christ alone was not sufficient for salvation.  Though they might have professed a belief in the gospel, they did not do so without an addition to the gospel.  In Paul's assessment, this was "another gospel" (Gal. 1:6).

 

Should churches be on guard for the same kind of "spies" who have ill-motives to turn the church away from the purity of the gospel for a man-centered gospel?  Indeed, we must be vigilant!  Just how easy is it for a person of this stripe to "infiltrate" a church?  In Baptist churches there is a little piece of paper called a "church letter," that in most cases can give a person carte blanche opportunity to join any other Baptist church.  They can come from a Baptist church that does not preach the gospel, but with the "church letter," they expect to be accepted without question.  In the earlier days when this practice was instituted, there was much more examination of those who made professions of faith in Christ.  But now that is rarely the case.

 

I know of two different people who, a few years ago, were interested in being church members.   I had talked with them concerning the gospel and their salvation.  One did not understand the gospel, while the other refused to receive the gospel on Christ's terms.  They were interested in being church members but did not have an equal interest in the gospel.  So, what did they do?  They left attending our church and immediately joined two different Baptist churches in our city!  I hope they both came to faith in Christ!  But my real concern, having spent considerable time explaining the gospel to them, is that they satisfied their emotions by joining a church, being baptized, then ignoring the issue of the gospel.  Now, unless a church has some means of examination set in place, these people can move to another city or within our city, join another Baptist church without question, and begin to infiltrate them with their false understanding of the gospel.  The spies can still infiltrate our churches and cause immeasurable damage.

 

2.  Motive of opposition

 

What were these gospel-opponents trying to do?  They were trying to enslave young professors of Christ by their shrewd teaching.  Or as Paul put it, they were spying "in order to bring us into bondage."  The very term means that they sought to do something which would have enslaved others.  Here it implies the slavery of the Law that has no power to justify.  It was that yoke which the Jews bore for hundreds of years, that yoke of trying to position themselves before God in righteousness by their works of the law.  The Law never justified anyone during that period, nor could it during Paul's day, nor does it in our own day.

 

As we have noted previously, the hardest thing for a person to accept is that he can do absolutely nothing to justify himself before God.  Man wants to do something.  Particularly, in our society of rugged individualism, people are easily swayed into thinking that 'God helps those who help themselves', so they must help God out.  They must add to the work of Christ their own works of service or their baptism or their following particular liturgies or their membership in particular churches.  'Oh, if I can just teach or preach or sing in the choir, then God will be pleased so that he just cannot reject me!'  'If I can just go on a mission trip or be on a church committee or be a church officer, then I will have what I need to be right with God!'

 

My brethren, I have only one word for such thoughts:  "BONDAGE!"  Yes, the whole motive of those who creep into churches without truly being justified is to tie others up with the same bondage that has enslaved them.  Miserable sinners love the company of more miserable sinners.  They despise the company of the saints!  They will work tirelessly and deceitfully, to persuade others that Jesus Christ and His finished work is just not enough.  We stand with the Apostle to reject such false gospel!

 

3.  Stand against opposition

 

Yes, Paul stood firm against the Judaizers.  "But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you."  The "hour" was the smallest increment of time in the Greek language.  So what Paul meant was that he gave them no time at all.  It was not even a casual thought in the Apostle's mind to compromise the truth of the gospel for the bondage of Jewish legalism.  He had lived in that kind of legalism.  He understood its enslaving power.  Now he would not rest until the truth of the gospel glowed brightly among the Galatians.

 

What is this 'truth of the gospel'?  Martin Luther wrote, "Now the truth of the gospel is, that our righteousness cometh by faith alone, without the works of the law.  The corruption, or the falsehood of the gospel is, that we are justified by faith, but not without the works of the law."  There are plenty who say they believe in being justified by faith, but they refuse to qualify that with by faith alone.  For they will add to the gospel something of their own making.  To this we must stand against without flinching.  I agree with Martin Luther, "For a true and steadfast faith must lay hold upon nothing, but Christ alone, and in the terrors of conscience it hath nothing else to lean upon, but this diamond Christ Jesus" [Galatians, 47-48].

 

How do we take such a stand?  (1) I believe it begins with spending our lives studying the gospel of Jesus Christ, so that by knowing "the truth of the gospel," we can easily recognize error.  The main reason that error spreads through churches comes right back to a neglect of studying the rich truths of the gospel.  (2) Then we need to use every opportunity God gives for proclaiming the truth of the gospel to unbelievers, "seeing that I have been entrusted with the gospel."  Our unbelieving friends hear plenty of 'false gospel' from the world and unfortunately, sometimes from organized churches.  So we must know what constitutes the gospel and not hesitate to explain it with authority to others, always with a view that God might be pleased to use our gospel explanations to bring a sinner to faith in Christ.  (3) I believe we must also be willing to take a stand in discussions on the gospel among professing Christians.  There are those who are genuinely saved, but who are weak in the faith.  They may be facing some confusions, so graciously, patiently, and tenderly, help them through in grasping the glorious truth of the gospel.

 

III. Entrusted with the gospel  vv. 6-10

 

Paul's meeting with the key apostles turned out just as he had hoped.  They stood with him in the content and proclamation of the gospel.  Paul said that "those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me."  He was not being cocky by such a statement, but rather his understanding of the gospel was on the same par as theirs.  They did not make any additions, in this case circumcision, to his gospel message.  Instead, they all recognized that God had entrusted them with the gospel and that the Lord Himself had sent them to their respective territories of gospel ministry.

 

1.  A God-given commission

 

Paul's "gospel to the uncircumcised," and Peter's gospel "to the circumcised," were not two different gospels.  That was just the point Paul was making in this portion of Galatians.  They were not on two different pages when it came to the contents of the gospel.  Instead, they both carried the same gospel to distinctly different people.  Both had been commissioned by the Lord.  As Paul expresses it, "for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles."  Same gospel; same God at work; same spiritual power; just different audiences, we could say.

 

Would there be a difference in presenting the gospel to the Jews as compared with the Gentiles?  Certainly there would due to the Jewish mind that had been steeped in Old Testament teaching, with all of the Messianic ideas.  The essential contents of the gospel remains the same, but the approach in reaching the diversity of people on the globe may vary from place to place.  For instance, when missionaries prepare to begin their work in another country, one of the first things they do is to study the other country's language, culture, and historical background.  All of this helps in understanding how to communicate the gospel--the same gospel--into the cultural and linguistic setting different from one's own.  There are words and concepts we use in the Western world that will not translate sensibly in the Asian or African world.  So we must recognize the differences in our audiences and seek to communicate the same gospel message within the framework of language and cultural concepts they understand.  (This should give us something extra to pray about for our missionaries!)

 

2.  A fellowship in the gospel

 

It is a joyous fellowship that we enjoy with a diverse group of believers across the globe, to be entrusted with the gospel of Jesus Christ!  As we recognize the grace of God given to others for salvation and the work of the gospel, then we need to stand with them in the fellowship of the gospel.  We may be different in some of our polity and practices, but if we stand together in the gospel, then we have a true fellowship that cannot be broken.  Paul expressed this when he wrote,  "And recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we might go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised."  The right hand of fellowship showed that their doctrines were the same, their missions were the same, and they agreed together that God had called them to focus their attention upon different people.

 

Conclusion

 

I'm thankful for the many people we can stand with in the fellowship of the gospel.  Our skin colors vary, our backgrounds and education levels are different, our language and colloquialisms may seem strange to each other, but we stand upon the same truth of Jesus Christ and Him crucified for sinners.  Let us never be so narrow to think that no one else has the truth of the gospel.  Nor let us be so undiscerning to think that every group that claims to be Christian proclaims the truth of the gospel.  Instead, let us have an ear for the truth of the gospel and encourage all who stand upon the truth of Scripture in dependence upon the power of the Spirit, in proclaiming the saving message of the cross and resurrection of our Lord.  And let us stand firmly for the truth of the gospel in the face of those who would water it down or compromise its solitary nature of faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone, by the grace of God alone.

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way and you do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction. For web posting, a link to this document on our website is preferred. Any exceptions to the above must be explicitly approved by South Woods Baptist Church.

Please include the following statement on any distributed copy:

Copyright South Woods Baptist Church. Website: www.southwoodsbc.org. Used by permission as granted on web site. Questions, comments, and suggestions about our site can be sent here.