The Galatian Suppositions

[GracePeace]

From Paul Ellis....” escape to Reality”...

The good news of heaven declares that everything comes to us as a free gift from our heavenly Father. But the bad news of earth says you better work baby, because there’s no such thing as a free lunch!

Your choice is grace or works. Either the favor of God is given or earned, but it can’t be both.

The gospel that Jesus revealed and Paul preached proclaims it’s grace from start to finish. How then are we to explain these verses which suggest you must work to be blessed?

Jesus Paul
Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evilwill rise to be condemned. John (5:28-29) God will repay each person according to what they have done. To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. (Rom 2:6-8)
.

If these were the only verses in the Bible you could build a whole religion on the importance of doing good or being blessed through good works, and many have. Such a message appeals to our sense of right and wrong but it’s a cursed message that promotes self-trust and self-righteousness.

Let’s start with the words of Jesus who said “those who have done good will rise to live.” That’s very clear. There’s no ambiguity. If you “done good” you will live, but what does it mean to do good? Jesus tells us a few verses earlier:

I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life. (John 5:24)

Doing good, as Jesus defines it, is hearing and believing Jesus. Nothing more, nothing less.

“That can’t be it. It’s too simple. There must be some work that God requires from me.”

Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.” (John 6:29)

Want to impress God? Then be impressed with Jesus. Want to do something good with your life? Then drop your cheap sacrifice and marvel at his infinitely sublime one.

Being persuaded that Jesus is who he says he is, and living from that persuasion, is the most productive thing you can do with your life. The seed of God’s word is fruitful. It will grow and bear a harvest all by itself. But we can certainly hinder that process through doubt and unbelief. Trying to make things happen is one of the most destructive things you can do. So don’t do it. Labor to enter his rest and stay there.

This cut-and-paste of yours did not address the Scripture.

Prove I've gone wrong :

Romans 2
6He will render to each one according to his works: 7to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8but for those who are self-seekinga and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. 9There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11For God shows no partiality.
12For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. 14For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.

 

[GracePeace]

“That can’t be it. It’s too simple. There must be some work that God requires from me.”

Yeah, actually, you'd better have good works on the Day of Judgment

Matthew 22
10And those servants went out into the roads and gathered all whom they found, both bad and good. So the wedding hall was filled with guests. 11“But when the king came in to look at the guests, he saw there a man who had no wedding garment. 12And he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless. 13Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot and cast him into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

What are the "wedding garments"?

Revelation 19
7Let us rejoice and exult
and give him the glory,
for the marriage of the Lamb has come,
and his Bride has made herself ready;
8it was granted her to clothe herself
with fine linen, bright and pure”—
for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints.

So, the guest who was thrown out of the wedding was thrown out because he didn't have good works.

Matthew 25
26But his master answered him, ‘You wicked and slothful servant!"

So, this servant (Christian) gets sent to hell because he is "lazy". "Lazy" is the opposite of someone who works.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

There is a fate worse than eternal death. Yes, fear the one who can destroy both body and soul, but does anyone consider that although that is Sodoms fate, we are told it will go better on that day for Sodom than it will for some others?

The water flowed out from the garden in four directions, there are four directions a man can go on earth, and Rev 22:11 describes four different men.

Revelation 22:11, ESV: "Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right, and the holy still be holy.”"

I have to give credit to my friend, John, for answering my question as to how it will be worse for some on that day than it will be for Sodom. He is the one who helped me with that question.

 

[Netchaplain]

however, was that he was causing the Gentiles to "live like a Jew".

Not sure if we're discussing exactly the same issue, but Jews not eating with the Gentiles, and many other practices were not after the Law but only after manmade Jewish traditions and customs. To live after the Law was to first be circumcised because the rest didn't matter if you weren't.

In case there is any uncertainty as to what is meant by "live like a Jew", it is defined for us : "justified by works of the Law".

Do you mean being justified by works of the Law or attempting to be justified by works of the Law?

Appreciating your input and God bless!

 

[GracePeace]

Not sure if we're discussing exactly the same issue, but Jews not eating with the Gentiles, and many other practices were not after the Law but only after manmade Jewish traditions and customs. To live after the Law was to first be circumcised because the rest didn't matter if you weren't.


Do you mean being justified by works of the Law or attempting to be justified by works of the Law?

Appreciating your input and God bless!

1) When Paul confronts Peter for his not eating with Gentile Christians when the Jewish Christians were present, for causing the Gentile Christians to live as Jews, he defines Peter's error as misleading the Gentiles into believing justification is through the works of the Law, so, no, we're not talking about a mere "custom". The reason Peter would not have eaten with the Gentile Christians in the presence of Jewish Christians would have been because Gentile Christians would not have eaten kosher food--and he had "feared" the Jewish Christians, had wanted their approval. This issue was exactly what they had already confronted him about after he had had the vision and had eaten with Gentiles--"You visited uncircumcised men and ate with them." Acts 11:3. Again, the theme of the letter is repeated over and over and over and over : Christians are not under Law Galatians 4:21-31. How is "eating with Gentiles" tantamount to violating the Law--such that Peter, who was wrongly bringing Gentile Christians "under the Law", would not have done it in the presence of the Jewish Christians whose approval he desired? Because the Law stipulates that a Jew must be "careful" to keep the Commandments Deuteronomy 12:32, but if you go to eat with a Gentile, and in his home no less, there is no way you are being "careful" to keep the dietary Law, because Gentiles do not avoid accidental ingestion of insects (which Jews must avoid eating most insects), so their foods will have insects, they do not eat kosher animals, nor would they even be guaranteed to prepare kosher animals in a kosher way (eg, even on kosher animals, there are certain cuts of meat and certain kinds of fats which Jews are prohibited from eating; the kosher animal had to have certifiably not been a "carcass" found Deuteronomy 14:21, but had died healthy and only by reason of it having been butchered, etc), so you would ipso facto automatically be breaking the Law (by not being "careful"). Therefore, this incident in Antioch is yet another instance where Paul was confronting the error of Christians (Jew or Gentile actually) being "under Law". Again, this is not about a mere "custom". It is the same theme reiterated.

2) It's not relevant whether I mean "being justified by works of the Law" or "attempting to be justified by works of the Law" : the point is that "works of the Law" is what Peter was doing, and misleading the Gentile believers into doing, so we're not talking about a mere "custom".

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Appreciate your input, and "bewitched" is a bit of a strong usage, but I still think if it were more than just an influence ("bewitched") it would be phrased something like "have not" or "will not," instead of "should not obey the truth." Especially considering Paul in the following verse reminding them that were saved by faith, and not works.

It's clear the Galatians were deceived enough to contemplate the error, but the Epistle to me presents only confirmation that they remained in the faith of the Gospel of Christ.

Well it is more than just an influence. It is beguiling or charming someone away from one thing to another. Today we would say they gave a very philosophically reasonable argument as to why we should abandon grace and take up the law. It is deceiving people by smooth talk and reason.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Stop using logic. Words do not have meaning here. Superimposition of a predetermined narrative will show us the truth here!

Okay what does this mean...;l.jeoswhfhrio eikthnbgn dkejrjhdd:)

 

[Ronald Nolette]

LOL So Christ was of no avail to Paul because he was circumcised? What a mess. Dump Calvinism.

If you mean the "five points" NEVER !!!!!!!!!

 

[GracePeace]

Okay what does this mean...;l.jeoswhfhrio eikthnbgn dkejrjhdd:)

I believe I was approving of your post, but I was being sarcastic because there is an aversion to truth among some.

 

[GracePeace]

I have to give credit to my friend, John, for answering my question as to how it will be worse for some on that day than it will be for Sodom.

Wouldn't it be explained by Luke 12:47-48?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I believe I was approving of your post, but I was being sarcastic because there is an aversion to truth among some.

That is what I thought as well, that is why I was using sarcastic humor backl!

 

[Netchaplain]

Very interesting... Never thought about it that light. However, while I agree that Paul saw a chance to correct it (praise God for correction), they were seriously in danger and leaning that way.

Hi and thanks for your reply! Not to start a different issue but to make a point, if one is an osas believer (as I am), we "irrevocably" possess eternal life, and nothing will alter it (Rom 11:29).

They were not a lost cause, but they were on the wrong road.
Because of what I have noted, I must respectfully disagree. I do not believe they were fully persuaded and thus not a lost cause. However, yes they were doing those things Paul warned them not to do.

I also agree they were not lost. I also believe that they were fooled (bewitched) enough to consider that they "should not obey the truth. Otherwise the phrase would be "have not obeyed the truth."

It didn't say who is trying to bewitch you. The "poison" had been injected and was taking its toll already. Yet, the damage was reversible and the spread to full corruption hindered.

Appears we agree that they didn't follow them! To me, the point in this Epistle, and the reason I wrote the article, concerns the misunderstanding about them supposedly "falling away" from salvation. Many "depart from the truth" or fall from the doctrine of grace (salvation), but never from truth and grace itself. Many falsely profess faith in Christ, as they are eventually seen to apostatize. To me only those reborn will not apostatize, manifesting they are not hypocrites.

 

[GracePeace]

Hi and thanks for your reply! Not to start a different issue but to make a point, if one is an osas believer (as I am), we "irrevocably" possess eternal life, and nothing will alter it (Rom 11:29).


I also agree they were not lost. I also believe that they were fooled (bewitched) enough to consider that they "should not obey the truth. Otherwise the phrase would be "have not obeyed the truth."


Appears we agree that they didn't follow them! To me, the point in this Epistle, and the reason I wrote the article, concerns the misunderstanding about them supposedly "falling away" from salvation. Many "depart from the truth" or fall from the doctrine of grace (salvation), but never from truth and grace itself. Many falsely profess faith in Christ, as they are eventually seen to apostatize. To me only those reborn will not apostatize, manifesting they are not hypocrites.

No, they didn't fall away from salvation, they just fell away from the Savior and He became of no avail to them that's all. LOL!

 

[FHII]

Hi and thanks for your reply! Not to start a different issue but to make a point, if one is an osas believer (as I am), we "irrevocably" possess eternal life, and nothing will alter it (Rom 11:29).

I do believe in predestination, and if we are going to discus that in view of the Galatians, I am fine with that. What we must realize is that while it is a fact that God does predestinate, he rarely tells who is predestinated for what. He gives the plan. He tells us if we do this and that, we are going to do fine. But we still have to follow the plan. God doesn't tell us if we will succeed or fail to do that.

With the Galatians, it may have foreordained that Paul would have to intervene. But they were on the wrong path. Whether or not they were truly predestinated for success depends if they heeded Paul's advice. We know that the Corinthians did because there was a second epistle.

That being said, did the Galatians change their ways?

 

[Netchaplain]

1) When Paul confronts Peter for his not eating with Gentile Christians when the Jewish Christians were present, for causing the Gentile Christians to live as Jews, he defines Peter's error as misleading the Gentiles into believing justification is through the works of the Law, so, no, we're not talking about a mere "custom".

Just want to mention that the only wrong Peter was in concerned him not eating with the Gentiles (Gal 2:12); as "the Jews did (Gal 2:14). This was not written in the Law but rather added for tradition. Like many other additions which weren't in the Law and were only "traditions of men" (Mat 15:9).

 

[Netchaplain]

Well it is more than just an influence. It is beguiling or charming someone away from one thing to another. Today we would say they gave a very philosophically reasonable argument as to why we should abandon grace and take up the law. It is deceiving people by smooth talk and reason.

I agree, but the wrong was demonstrated by what did, which is not what he taught:

Barnes, Gal 2:14 "The fault was not that he taught error of doctrine, but that he sinned in conduct. Inspiration, though it kept the apostles from teaching error, did not keep them necessarily from sin. A man may always teach the truth, and yet be far from perfection in practice. The case here proves that Peter was not perfect, a fact proved by his whole life."
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/bnb/galatians-2.html

 

[Netchaplain]

I do believe in predestination, and if we are going to discus that in view of the Galatians, I am fine with that. What we must realize is that while it is a fact that God does predestinate, he rarely tells who is predestinated for what. He gives the plan. He tells us if we do this and that, we are going to do fine. But we still have to follow the plan. God doesn't tell us if we will succeed or fail to do that.

With the Galatians, it may have foreordained that Paul would have to intervene. But they were on the wrong path. Whether or not they were truly predestinated for success depends if they heeded Paul's advice. We know that the Corinthians did because there was a second epistle.

That being said, did the Galatians change their ways?

Like your comments! If by ways you mean they were considering the Law, the Epistle never presents evidence that they gave in, because it doesn't show them being circumcised, which must be performed first.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Paul was declaring this to every man there whether Jew or Gentile (Gal 5:3) who were already circumcised. I would think this would exclude these Gentile Christians, considering in the last Chapter that the Judaizers were still "desiring" them to be circumcised (Gal 6:13).

Greetings, Netchaplain!

Interesting discussion going on in this thread, although I take largely the same view here as Ferris Bueller and GracePeace.

The problem with your argument here is that this was a clearly Gentile church. To superimpose over the situation that Paul was suddenly writing predominantly to the Jews among them presupposes two things:

1. That there was a significant Jewish presence in the church at all, which cannot be proven, and
2. That if there was, Paul was suddenly addressing them more exclusively.

If Paul knew exactly who these Judaizers were because they were already present within the Galatian congregation among them, he would not have asked them, "Who has bewitched you?" He would have known already, and would been addressing them in the letter. There's too many suppositions that don't add up to make your theology work here.

God bless, and hope you are having a wonderful day!
- H

 

[FHII]

Like your comments! If by ways you mean they were considering the Law, the Epistle never presents evidence that they gave in, because it doesn't show them being circumcised, which must be performed first.

Well that's confusing. Of course the epistle isn't going to give evidence that they caved in. It wasn't and account like the Gospels or Acts. It was a letter that was meant to address what was already happening. It isn't going to tell us what happened after they received the letter.

With the Corinthians, we know that they heeded Paul's advice because he wrote a second letter to them afterwards. We don't know if the Galatians took Paul's advice to heart because there is no 2 Galatians. Now if there is something in his other Epistles or the book of Acts that tells us, I can't remember, so please remind me.

But again, they MUST'VE been going down that road, otherwise Paul would've never had the need to write such a stern letter to them.

 

[Netchaplain]

Well that's confusing. Of course the epistle isn't going to give evidence that they caved in. It wasn't and account like the Gospels or Acts. It was a letter that was meant to address what was already happening. It isn't going to tell us what happened after they received the letter.

With the Corinthians, we know that they heeded Paul's advice because he wrote a second letter to them afterwards. We don't know if the Galatians took Paul's advice to heart because there is no 2 Galatians. Now if there is something in his other Epistles or the book of Acts that tells us, I can't remember, so please remind me.

But again, they MUST'VE been going down that road, otherwise Paul would've never had the need to write such a stern letter to them.

It reminds me of Christ's words to the 7 Asian Churches. It's my understanding that they heeded His words, and it was only because of His "rebuke and chastening" from His love.

I also believe there is no reason to consider they decided to "be none otherwise minded" (Gal 5:10); as Paul was (Gal 4:12). You may be correct about Scripture being inconclusive about this issue in Galatians, but I think the issue of knowing the outcome is important, and that there is enough Biblical support to determine a conclusion. Thanks for your input, and God bless!