Galatians Chapter 2

Finally, no outage!

vs 11

We are continuing in history. It seems that Paul, the least of the Apostles, got into the face (lit. against the face) of Peter, the redeemed apostle. So now Paul is telling the Apostles how to act! "Clearly in the wrong" is literally "he was having been condemned" if you're interested.

vs 12

Paul got all in his face because he's a hypocrite! Peter, the first Apostle to see a convert from outside Judaism and Samaria, the one to whom God particularly showed a vision breaking this stupid attitude, was afraid of the circumcision group! (I called them Judaisers, same people.)

You will note with interest that it was some people who came from James who caused Peter to go against what he'd been doing in Antioch with Paul - socialising and eating with the non-Jews. James was the big kahuna in Jerusalem, and so Peter might have been afraid of what was going to be said back in Jerusalem. Interestingly though, it is James in Acts 15 who ends up agreeing to allow gentiles to be Christian and yet act as gentiles. Historically speaking, it's hard to know if this was written before or after the Acts 15 proclamation. But most conservative Evangelical scholars would accept a date before the council, because otherwise Paul would have mentioned it in his letter and argument, and it's hard to imagine Peter vacillating between two positions after he had been involved in a proclamation of the church over the situation.

vs 13

You can imagine how devastating this thing Peter did was to Paul's ministry. A person who is on equal rank with him in church matters (probably a little higher) is contradicting the words of Paul by his own actions. No wonder there needed to be an Acts 15 type decision! This was such a contentious issue: Peter's wrong actions show many of the Jews were just too uncomfortable to hang out with gentiles, and even Barnabas went onto Peter's side against Paul! Of course, Barnabas isn't Paul's slave or anything - they were equals in the ministry - but it shows just how hard Paul had it, when everyone was against him.

vs 14

So Paul let him have it! The NIV and NASB show quote marks till the end of the chapter, but of course there are none in the original greek, so we just assume that that's where they go to. They certainly can't go further than that (Paul wouldn't say to Peter "You foolish Galatians!").

Now just exactly what Paul is referring to here is difficult to say. He could be referring to Peter's recent actions of eating with gentiles (which everyone would have known about). Or he could be referring to the fact that Christians, even Jewish Christians, were not living as Jews back then. Regardless, Peter knew what Paul meant - a Jew living as a gentile can't tell gentiles to live as Jews.

vs 15-16

VITMOAI man strikes again!

Of course, not all Jews knew that Christ was the way. But obviously those who were from the Jerusalem church, and Peter and Paul and Barnabas, would all know. Forcing people to follow these rules was not going to help them become Christians, it wasn't going to make them in better standing before God, and it wasn't going to attract them either. I mean, come on, if someone came to you and said "You're not worshipping God hard enough - but we'll remove a piece of your genitalia, that will help" you'd say "WTF?!"

vs 17

Just because through Christ we have our sin revealed to us (just like in the law) does that make Christ a servant of sin? Of course not. That's like saying a mirror makes you ugly because it shows you what you look like.

vs 18

Of course, you have to be the one who destroyed it for this to work. I'm not 100% sure whether Paul is referring this comment to the one before (so if Jesus was rebuilding the relationship between men and God because God broke it, then it would show that it was God's fault). But he might also be referring to his comments to come (so that if you break the law, and then upon breaking it try to rebuild it, you are only proving that you are sinful - it's not going to help save you).

vs 19

The law does not provide salvation, only death. So the law kills you, or condemns you, and God saves you through Christ, so that you might live.

vs 20

The life we now live is not our own life, which was marred and marked and condemned by the law. It is Christ's life, which is perfect and righteous before the law. It is not a life of active pursuance of the law - it is a life of faith in the work of Christ because of his love for us.

vs 21

Continuing to follow the law isn't the issue here. It is insisting that the law is required that is the problem. It's value is at an end because it has been fulfilled through Christ! We can look at it and see just how unrighteous we are, but in following it nothing is gained. If something could be gained by following it, if you could be righteous for following the law, then why did Christ die?