ONCE MORE WITH EMPHASIS

Paul concludes his letter. He has written all that he wanted to say. He has issued a stern rebuke. He has also laid done a practical agenda for pastoral concern among the community of believers. It is as if he concludes by giving a final summary which gains in emphasis because he has put it in bold and italics and then underlined it. Here, as he has emphasised elsewhere, the cross of Christ is a stumbling-block to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks, "but to those who believe, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God" (I Corinthians 1: 23-24).

     This is the point from which Paul wants his personal identity to be located. The Lord Almighty had provided him with the way by which his life could find fulfilment - the only way. And that is way in which God's promises come to fulfilment in the cross of Jesus Christ. God in His Son has taken upon Himself the curse and indignity of human sin - "and with His stripes we are healed" (Isaiah 53: 5).

    BRUCE C. WEARNE completes his series on Galatians with an examination of Paul's final words...  | more... |

DO ALL THE GOOD YOU CAN TO ALL THE PEOPLE YOU MEET
The divisions in the Bible, chapters and verses, can sometimes give a wrong impression. This is a good example. We can tend to think we have made an important discovery when we link 6: 1 to 5: 26. Well, what Paul says here is, of course, linked to what was written immediately prior. The tendency to be "caught off guard', to be hijacked by a sinful tendency, is indeed something that we should assume will happen, but, he says, we should therefore get ourselves prepared for a way of responding that is respecting our created and redeemed inter-dependence. The Spirit's fruit is shown to us in our life-together. We should therefore seek to have that fruit displayed in the way we respond to those who blunder down wrong paths.

     This then is an important part of our walk. We walk together. Paul gives no ground for one member establishing him/herself at the expense of other members. Self-conceit, provocation, competitivism, envy are all manifestations of the flesh and thus cannot build us in our lives together. The path of the Spirit on which we march in step stoikvmen (5: 25) - which contrasts with the " ways of the world" (4: 3,9 stoikeia tou kosmou) - does not fragment into each member asserting his or her priority (6: 3).

    BRUCE C. WEARNE continues his series of Galatians with a look at what Paul says about walking together...  | more... |

WALKING THE WAY OF THE SPIRIT
Now recall that Paul is addressing a community of believers in Jesus Christ - Jews and Gentiles, slaves and free, male and female (3: 27-28). One wonders how this letter was received. Did the chairman of the church council receive it, make a judgment that it would cause waves and simply file it away? Should we be surprised if that occurred in some instances?

     It was not what Paul had intended but then the message itself, its radical and decisive turn, is something that generations of Christians have repeatedly filed away. By its tone, this was no "confidential report for leaders only". This was a loud call to repentance, a decisive declaration that Christians need to turn from their foolish presumption, and I can imagine that it was written with half a dozen copies made to be sent to various locations throughout Galatian region.

     We don't know those details for sure, but what we do know is that Paul wrote to get the people back on the right path - the path of the Spirit of God who had spurred them to take the decisive step and believe in Jesus Christ crucified in the first place (3: 1-5).

    BRUCE C. WEARNE continues his series on the New Testament book of Galatians...  | more... |

CALLED TO FREEDOM
The passage about "bearing one another's burdens" comes in the next chapter. Very often, it is quoted as a basic principle of Christian solidarity. And no doubt it is that. But it should not be read out of its context in this letter. The precept is actually the principle that Paul derives from his entire letter - he unloads his dismay, his "burden", on the churches of Galatia, the Christian believers who were found in that region.

     We have to read the much revered passages found in Paul's letters in context. Think of the famous "love" passage of I Corinthians 13, or the humility of Jesus in Philippians 2 or the whole armour of God of Ephesians 6. We also have to try to understand his argument from listening, as it were, to only one end of the telephone conversation he is having with those to whom he is writing.

     But we also need to read other New Testament books with care to help us understand the issues he is raising. The book of Acts is a crucial resource for understanding this letter as we have found in Paul's comments about Peter. But at this point in the Galatian church letter, a serious problem arises because the words on their own suggest that circumcision is completely "out". Wouldn't that mean the end of circumcision as a cultural practise for Jewish Christians as well, now that uncircumcised (akrobustia, verse 6) Gentiles are not required to submit to the rite?

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE examines what Paul says about circumcision...  | more... |

FREEDOM IN CHRIST

Paul rejects the Galatian desire to be "under the law" with a subtle argument that left the Galatians in no doubt about where he stood. To insist that believers in Christ come "under the law" can only divide the community of faith down the middle and destroy it. The division will only make second-class believers of the Gentiles.

     It is difficult to see how the pattern established by the circumcision of Ishmael and confirmed in the Law - Genesis 21 - could be put into practice in an everyday sense. Insisting on the rite of circumcision would give a kind of priority in membership to those declared "free men" (if not "free women") by their Jewish descent.

     But then, the coming of the Messiah Jesus will have to be reinterpreted as a bequest that gives priority to the sons of Israel (it is not clear how the daughters are to fare here), enabling them to assume a position as the rightful rulers of the Gentiles. Gentile circumcision may be required, but the Gospel, as the fulfilled Promise of blessing to all nations, will have been lost.

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE explains why Sarah was free...  | more... |

THE COVENANT OF SLAVERY? I DON'T THINK SO (II)

To continue...If then the Galatians are suggesting that Hagar's slavery to Sarah, and Ishmael's circumcision, is their historical precedent for insisting that Gentiles be circumcised, in that such obedience looked forward to the giving of the Law on Sinai, then they also imply that Sinai's Law was the fulfillment of the Promise.

     The Mosaic law about slavery (Exodus 21) simply confirms the Promise God gave to Abraham that in him all the peoples of the earth would be blessed. But then, says Paul, if adherence to the Law of Moses is justified as fulfillment of the Promise, will not the Hagar-Sinai allegory will also have to be applied to the servitude Jerusalem currently experiences with her children? What kind of Promise fulfillment is that? What does the Roman occupation of the Land of Promise say now about the rule of the Messiah? And further, what does it say about the Galatians themselves and their faith in Jesus Christ? Paul is clearly referring to the Roman occupation of Israel; and the Galatian allegory collapses in tatters.

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE continues his look at how Paul uses the story of Hagar and Ishmael to refute claims Gentiles should be circumcised "in the flesh"...  | more... |

THE COVENANT OF SLAVERY? I DON'T THINK SO (I)

We noted throughout these studies points where it is difficult to comprehend Paul's exact appeal. Now the text gets very complex where Paul has confronts the argument of the Galatian church elders to justify their "desire to be under the Torah" (verse 21). His discussion of an allegorical interpretation is part of his refutation of their stance.

     Paul considers their justification and discusses its implications. The Galatians, well versed in the story of Abraham (refer to "Brethren, sons of the family of Abraham..." Acts 13: 26), would know about the circumcision of Ishmael under the patriarchal rule of Abraham (Genesis 17: 23). So then, circumcision was required for those who were to be included in the extended family of Abraham even though they were "according to the flesh" and not of the line of Promise.

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE looks at how Paul uses the Old Testament story of Sarah and Hagar to make a point...  | more... |

GETTING ALONGSIDE ONCE MORE

Paul's tone changes. He has proclaimed the Gospel to the Galatians once more, and here it is as if, while doing so, his own message has cut him to the quick. He recalls how he had met them. He recalls how he and Barnabas had been sent on their way by the church in Syrian Antioch and how he had first preached the Gospel in Pisidian Antioch. They knew who he was. They knew the great legacy that he had to overcome. They had happily welcomed this herald of the Gospel, herald of the Messiah of Israel, the apostle who gave them the good tidings about God's appointed ruler over all the Kings of all the earth.

     And Paul digs deep. He talks as one reconnecting with his own "children" at the deepest possible level. Here he confidently makes his case to win these wandering sheep back to the Spirit's path. He even notes that though their diversion might imply the deconstruction of his apostolic authority, they have not injured him at all. He knew Who had given him apostolic authority. He was not undermined by the Galatian turn to "zealous" paths.

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE investigates the reason behind Paul's change of tone...  | more... |

INHERITING THE PROMISE

Paul reiterates it once more. The Law was given to the people of the Promise so that they could continue living in the hope of the coming of Christ. Otherwise, their subjection to the basic ways of the cosmos (stoikeia tou kosmou, what the RSV, somewhat confusingly, refers to as "elemental spirits of the universe"), which all mankind had experienced since the fall, simply left them with no hope. However, the Law was given as a negative constraint to remind them of Who they belonged to by Promise, before Whom they were called to live until the Fulfillment when the Spirit of Blessing would be poured out upon all nations.

     Now, since the coming of the Promised One, Paul affirms that the Lord is not only intent upon starting again - the redemption - from what He had created as some kind of once for all initiative back with Abram. No, He was actively breathing new life into humankind according to (His Promise in) Jesus Christ. He made Himself known in an ongoing way through His Promise to Abram - "walk before Me!" meaning walk along with Me! - and the people caught up on this freshly breathed Promised way, would in time find themselves constrained - even as in a prison or a school - subject to a Law which the Lord granted them to help them wait with wisdom, keeping them on track.

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE takes a look at the start of chapter four...  | more... |

BELIEVING THE PROMISE AND FORSAKING THE FOOLISHNESS (IV)

The Promise was as good as ratified when the Lord took the initiative and gave His Promise to Abraham. In human transactions, once a will is ratified then what the benefactor bequeaths comes lawfully to those identified in the will as recipients. But when Paul discusses the Law (Torah), he is discussing why the Law was promulgated to serve those who were identified as the ones to carry the Promise. As the people of the Promise, why would they need any addition to their bequest?

     In the first instance, Paul's answer is related to what he assumes about the inheritance. What is the inheritance? The Benefactor had said to Abraham and his offspring - "You, and your seed, are the people of my Promise; I am your inheritance. Believe it." That was the assurance of the Lord, a Promise to watch over Abraham and his progeny throughout their generations, as they waited for the Lord to fulfil His Promise. When it was fulfilled with the coming of Jesus Christ, the Blessing, the Bequest, would be realised and God Himself would dwell with His people, the people who received His promise by faith, and He would continue to walk with them.

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE continues the final part of his look at what Paul says about the Promise we are given...  | more... |

BELIEVING THE PROMISE AND FORSAKING THE FOOLISHNESS (III)

The Galatians had fallen in with a view that assumed God's promise needed validation. They accepted the presumption that Torah was God's way of ratifying the Promise given to Abraham. Another way of putting it would be: the Law was given by God to justify His promise to Abraham. Thus the Galatians assumed that they retained their standing before God by abiding by the Law given to Moses. That was how they could become the inheritors of the promise to Abraham. For them, the Law of Moses spelled out the necessary conditions by which Abraham's heirs according to the flesh could, by their own works, be justified as the spiritual heirs of the Promise. And so for Gentiles to become joint-heirs they had to become united with the Jews by being subjected to the Law.

     So what is Paul's response? He unravels their confusion by effectively showing them that they simply didn't know what they were talking about.

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE continues his look at what Paul says about the Promise we are given...  | more... |

BELIEVING THE PROMISE AND FORSAKING THE FOOLISHNESS (II)

Just as Abraham believed God and that (meant he) was accounted as (one with) right standing, so also (we say) the children of Abraham are indeed those who have (such) faith. And the Scripture, in the anticipation that God was going to put the nations in right standing (with Himself), proclaimed the gospel beforehand (in these words given) to Abraham: "In you shall all the nations be blessed." So then, those who are men of faith are blessed with Abraham who had faith.

     For all who would rely on works of the law are under (the law's) curse; it goes like this: "Cursed be everyone who does not keep everything written in this book and do them." And so, it is plain that no-one is in right standing with God by the law for (as it says) "the righteous person shall live through faith." But the law is not (a matter) of faith, for (as it says) "He who does these shall (indeed) live by them." Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for is - for it is also written, "Cursed be everyone who hangs on a tree" - that in Christ Jesus the blessing (promised) to Abraham might come to the nations, that we might (thereby) receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

     Paul states it baldly. Those of faith are specially cared for as Abraham's offspring. God has all along proclaimed Himself as the One who keeps His promises. He promised to work with Abram and grant right standing to all the people of faith of all the nations of the earth. So the question comes: who are these people of faith?

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE examines what Paul says about Abraham's example...  | more... |

BELIEVING THE PROMISE AND FORSAKING THE FOOLISHNESS (I)

"O foolish Galatians! Who has mesmerised you? You [the very ones] to whom Jesus Christ was so evidently presented [as] crucified. I would have you explain to me this: was it by [some or other] works of the law that you received the Spirit or was it by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit are you now to become perfect [or: perfect yourselves] in the flesh? Have you indeed really endured so much in vain - is that what it is? Does the one supplying the Spirit to you and working powerful deeds in your midst do so by your works of the law or by your hearing with faith?"

     What do we read here? Was Paul "losing it"? Is this about his explosive anger? Is that how we should read it?
     "O foolish Galatians!"

     Had not Jesus taught that calling a brother "fool" in anger was to be liable to the "hell of fire"? He had said that the commandment, "Thou shalt do no murder" was violated when we, with our angry words, as good as murder another (Matthew 5: 21). Such angry speech violates God's will for our lives. So, let's look again at what Paul says, how he says it and why?

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE takes a deeper look at why Paul calls the Galatians 'foolish'...  | more... |

THE INTEGRITY OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST (II)

We begin to see why Paul is concerned that the instability introduced into the Galatian congregations also threatens the ongoing reception of the Gospel elsewhere, in Syrian Antioch, and in Jerusalem. It would confirm trends in the Judaean churches, which threatened the integrity of these churches, and had been present for many years since the stoning of Stephen and its aftermath.

     As we have said, Paul goes on to discuss his confrontation with Peter's hypocrisy. But he does so to illustrate how it was that Peter's duplicity was overcome before the events already recounted. In other words, Paul is explaining how it was that the Gospel had emancipated the Jerusalem church from the troubling Judaic instability. Keep in mind that under Gamaliel's direction (Acts 5), the apostles had been kept from the persecution that erupted around the time Stephen was stoned when Paul led the persecution against the groups of believers (Acts 8).

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE looks at the reasons for why Paul says what he does in chapter two...  | more... |

THE INTEGRITY OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST (I)

Paul explains to his Galatian readers how the mission to the Gentiles, of which they were the fruit, came about and how it was endorsed in Jerusalem by James, the brother of Jesus, and the other apostles. At that point, there had been a definitive endorsement of the work of Paul and Barnabas by Peter (Cephas) (Acts 15: 6-11).

     Here, Paul refers to Peter and Cephas; clearly it is one and the same person. So, why does he do that?
     Cephas is the Aramaic name by which Jesus had said Peter would be known. We might say it is the name by which his Jewish fellows knew him. Jesus had said to him, "So you are Simon the son of John. You shall be called Cephas" (John 1: 42). Peter is the Greek equivalent and means "rock". This was a prophecy fulfilled when Peter became known by that name to believing Jews and Gentiles. And this also related to Peter's confession of Jesus as Messiah (Matthew 16: 13-20) which Jesus identified as the stone (petra) on which He would build His church.

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE looks at chapter two...  | more... |

PAUL'S GOSPEL, PAUL'S LIFE (2)

Read this account alongside the letters Peter wrote. Look at that place where Peter refers to Paul: "Some of the things Paul writes," he says, "are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures" (II Peter 3: 16).

     Remember how the Lord also dealt with Peter's ignorance and instability? Peter knew that whatever the problems which Paul had in communicating his message, Jesus was able to help him and make his message clear.

    So, we don't fall into a common trap of reading such statements as some kind of "do or die" competition between these apostolic leaders of the early church. If we do, we may find ourselves "twisting" them and, in the process, destroying our grasp of the insight and wisdom they provide. Why? Because these accounts are actually explaining how God's Spirit was working with and through both Peter and Paul.

    In his series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE looks at what it tells us about Paul - and Peter...  | more... |

PAUL'S GOSPEL, PAUL'S LIFE (1)

Why then does Paul give such emphasis to his own "path"? What is he trying to say? He is insistent. Whatever it is that has been going on among the Galatian churches, it has a direct and immediate impact upon his call, upon his own standing as a servant of Christ.

     He insists that the call he received to proclaim Christ to the Gentiles was from Christ and not handed to him by the apostles in Jerusalem. They may have had to confirm it later on, but now, with the Galatian churches on the precipice of deserting him, he looks back on his own call, on how it came about, and affirms that for him to "give an inch" and accept these (Galatian) developments would be an outright denial of the call to proclaim the Gospel among the Gentiles which came to him from the Lord Himself.

    In a new series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE looks at why Paul puts such an emphasis on his own walk of faith...  | more... |

A RIGHT 'HOW DO YOU DO?'!

     Those who had been carefully attending to Paul's formal opening, would have caught his urgency; they could have anticipated this outburst of deep concern. The writer of the letter wastes no time in telling the Galatian Christians his view of what they are doing. They have moved on. They have been swept along by a change which is so basic that it means an alternative gospel.

     Paul is astonished. Whatever they had done, the churches in Galatia were effectively on the way to deserting him outright - his words indicate his alarm at their desire to "go beyond" the Gospel which he had been privileged to proclaim to them. They had effectively taken to believing another gospel. It was not just a matter of "going beyond" Paul and his message; for Paul this was "going beyond" the Gospel itself.

    In a new series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE continues his look at Paul's introductory words...  | more... |

HOW DO YOU DO?

Read the entire letter and then come back and carefully re-read these opening statements - "Paul, an apostle - (sent) not from anyone nor by human (authority) but through Jesus Christ and the Father God who raised Him from the dead - along with all the brothers who are with me..." (RSV). How do you read them?

     If you are like me, this part will read as the formal opening of a letter. I suppose I'm referring to a time when we usually wrote letters with a pen before email came along. We would put our address, identify the person or organisation we were writing to and begin "Dear Mr …". This opening in Paul's letter can therefore be read a bit like that, as the formal part of a letter. Indeed, the publishers of the RSV version, which is resting on my desk in front of me, put the next phrase - "To the churches of Galatia..."

    In a new series examining the New Testament book of Galatians, BRUCE C. WEARNE finds out there's more behind the introduction than what might appear at first glance...  | more... |