Galatians Chapter 2

Galatians chapter 2 shows the basic differences in Paul’s and the Disciples’ messages. The Jewish Disciples had preached Christ as Israel's King and, at that point, had not yet learned that through His death the Mosaic Law was to be set aside. Paul's whole message to the Gentiles was based on the setting aside of the law; and the unfolding of the dispensation of the grace of God and the all-sufficient finished work of Jesus Christ at Calvary.

(Vs. 1-2)… Paul was not sent to check with the Disciples or to make sure that he was preaching the same message. Rather, the Lord sent him to Jerusalem to communicate to the leaders "that gospel which I [Paul] preach among the Gentiles.” Why did he need to tell them what he had been preaching to the Gentiles if his gospel was exactly the same as their gospel? This is not the only place where he used such wording regarding the message which he preached. Three times he called his good news "my gospel" (Rom. 2:16; 16:25; II Tim. 2:8). Frequently he said, "Our gospel," or "that gospel which I preach unto you" or "that gospel which ye have received of me," or "the gospel which was preached of me." Why should he put such emphasis on the distinctiveness of his message if it were not distinct and separate from that which the twelve had been preaching?

(Vs. 6)… The Lord chose twelve apostles, and when Judas betrayed Him, He instructed the eleven how to choose another. When Matthias was chosen, he was numbered with the eleven "and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:4). What about this other apostle, Paul? God later raised him up as another apostle, and he had to prove the validity of his apostleship to the leaders in the Jewish church at Jerusalem. He also had to prove the validity of his God-given message, the gospel of Chist, with its good news of salvation apart from the religious rites or ceremonies of the Mosaic law. He was presenting salvation by grace through faith in the finished, all sufficient, work of the Lord Jesus Christ at Calvary.

Isn’t it strange that Paul referred to James, Peter, and John as those "who seemed to be somewhat”? There was good reason for it. The James referred to here is not the same James of the twelve Disciples--- Peter, James, and John. The apostle James had already been killed by King Herod (Acts 12:2). The James referred to here in Galatians 2 is James "the Lord's brother" (Gal. 1:19) and apparently he had become the leader of the Disciples and the church at Jerusalem. This should not have happened. Jesus’ family was not superior to other followers. (Matthew 12:47-50) Secondly, the Lord had made Peter, not James, the head of the apostles and of the Pentecostal church at Jerusalem. (Matt. 16:19; Acts: 1:15; 2:14; 5:29). James, the Lord's brother; was not one of the twelve. "For neither did His brethren believe in Him” (John 7:5) (Psa. 69:8). What was he doing as the chairman of the council? Why had Peter relinquished his God-given position, and why had the other apostles permitted it?

He also said "in conference [they] added nothing to me" (vs. 6). What could those former fishermen and tax collectors tell him about God's Old Testament prophecies and their program? What could they tell him about Messiah and the promised Kingdom? He was "a Hebrew of the Hebrews" (Phil. 3:5), "a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee" (Acts 23:6), brought up in the Scriptures under the teaching of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). He was the greatest Pharisee of his time (Phil. 3:5; Acts 23:6). Paul knew the Old Testament Scriptures far better than they knew by the revelation of Jesus Christ; how those Scriptures had been fulfilled in Christ for he had now seen Him glorified in heaven. The twelve added nothing to Paul but he added something to them.

(Vs. 7-8)…Paul said that the good news of the circumcision was given to Peter. He did not say, "to James." He did not recognize James as the leader of the council. He recognized the council as a whole but he said that this message was given to Peter, and that God wrought effectively in him (Peter) the gospel of the circumcision. What is the gospel of the circumcision?

Abraham was given the rite of circumcision to separate himself and his circumcised seed from the adulterous Gentiles all about him. It was in connection with this great covenant, that through Abraham's seed the nations would be blessed, that Peter preached "good news" to Israel. They were the seed of Abraham, the physical offspring. They were called the circumcision. Peter told the Jews: "Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. Unto you first God, having raised up His Son Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities” (Acts 3:25,26).

They had rejected the King and His Kingdom. Peter therefore called upon them to acknowledge Jesus Christ as their true Messiah so that He might come back and the covenant might be fulfilled (Acts 3:19-21). It was through them, the circumcision, the offspring of Abraham, that all the nations of the earth were to be blessed. This was the good news, the gospel of the circumcision, that was committed to Peter.

Paul, however, declares that "the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed to me" (Gal. 2:7), and that Christ "was mighty in me toward the Gentiles" (vs. 8). Do not forget that before Abraham was ever circumcised, as a Gentile to whom God had made no previous promises, he was justified by faith alone:

"What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness” (Rom. 4:1-3). But the question arises: "How was it then reckoned [to Abraham)? When he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision?” And the answer: “Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision” (Rom. 4:10). It is on this basis that Paul proclaimed the wonderful “gospel of the UNcircumcision”: "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness” (Rom. 4:4,5). This is the message Paul defended at the Jerusalem council.

(Vs. 9)… Here we have further evidence that Paul’s message was new and unique; here we have a historic handshake that memorializes a change in dispensation! The Jewish Disciples had originally been sent "into all the world to preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15), "and teach all nations” (Matt. 28:19), which included the Gentiles. But our Lord also told Peter, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 18:18). In vs. 9 we have an occasion where both "loosing" and "binding" took place. The Jewish Disciples and the Jewish church at Jerusalem, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, loosed themselves from the so-called Great Commission, and agreed to bind Paul as "the apostle of the Gentiles" (Rom. 11:13) and to confine their ministry to the nation Israel.

(Vs. 10)… In the dispensation of law Solomon pointed to the ant, and said. "Go to the ant, thou sluggard [you lazy man]; consider her ways, and be wise” (Prov. 6:6). She lays up store in the summer for the time when the rain and the winter comes, so that she will be able to survive. In the dispensation of the Kingdom Jesus said, "Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them: how much more are ye better than the fowls?” (Luke 12:24). The raven does not have storehouses or barns, does not put away anything for the winter, yet the Lord cares for the ravens. "Therefore, I say unto you, Take no thought for your life...” (vs. 22). In other words, do not lay up anything for tomorrow, but trust the Lord to take care of you. This was because under the Kingdom they were not to lay up store for the future, but were to have all things in common. The Lord stated clearly to the rich young ruler, "...sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor...” (Mark 10:21). Jesus said to the twelve as He sent them out, "Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses” (Matt. 10:9-10). In Luke 12:32-33, He said to all of His disciples, "Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the Kingdom. Sell that ye have, and give alms.”

The apostles were not only instructed to pray "Thy Kingdom come,” but were also to add, "Give us this day our daily bread” (Matt. 6:10,11) in anticipation of the Kingdom of Heaven. At Pentecost, when they were "all filled with the Holy Spirit,” they actually began the practice of this program. "And all that believed were together, and had all things common; And [they) sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need” (Acts 2:44-45). “And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common... Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need” (Acts 4:32, 34-35). Later, after the Kingdom had again been rejected, after Stephen had been stoned, and after Paul had been raised up, the eleventh chapter of Acts records that a delegation was sent from Jerusalem to the Antioch church. In that delegation was a prophet “named Agabus, [who] signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world” (Acts 11:28). The Jerusalem church, as the Lord had commanded them, had nothing in store, anticipating the Millennial kingdom. At Antioch, however, the record states that they were not having everything in common, and that they sent financial aid to the church at Jerusalem. “Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judea: Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:29,30). Paul later wrote about “the poor saints which are at Jerusalem” (Rom. 15:26), and he had much to say about the collections from all Gentile churches to the church at Jerusalem. But in writing to Timothy, do you see how the program had changed: "But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel” (I Tim. 5:8).

(Vs. 11-14)… This is the second time that Peter got into trouble about Gentiles. Jerusalem was the headquarters of the Jewish church; Antioch was the headquarters of the Gentile church. When Peter returned to Jerusalem after ministering to Gentile Cornelius, they that were of the circumcision contended with him (Acts 11:2). At Jerusalem he was called to account for eating with the Gentiles (vs.3). At Antioch he was rebuked because he stopped eating with the Gentiles (Gal. 2:12). At Jerusalem he had rightly defended his action; he had done right by eating with the Gentiles. At Antioch he had no defense to offer for he was wrong; he should have continued to eat with and have fellowship with the Gentiles.

Wasn’t Paul making more trouble by rebuking Peter than Peter was making by withdrawing his fellowship? Was Paul practicing what he preached and later wrote to believers, that they should walk, "with all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:2,3)? God had been breaking down the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile (Eph. 2:14) and of the apostles at Jerusalem, no one knew this better than Peter. He had been shown in a vision that God wanted him to eat and have fellowship with the Gentiles in Cornelius' home and he had helped Paul's cause in the dispute at the Jerusalem council by reminding the Judaizers of that incident. He had declared that "God, which knoweth the hearts, bear them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as He did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith” (Acts 15:8-9). Peter had known and testified to the oneness of Jewish and Gentiles believers in Christ, but at Antioch he "withdrew" himself from the Gentiles. He had done it for fear of those of James' party. It was Peter who was causing the division; it was Paul who was endeavoring to restore unity. What should our attitude be in such cases? If we speak out against error, some will remind us that we should "endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit." If we truly believe that we should be one, then we should know the remedy for the division, our seven-fold oneness in Christ: "There is one Body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all” (Eph. 4:4-6).

This incident between Paul and Peter is a good lesson on the oneness of believers in Christ! It highlights how serious it is to break "the unity of the Spirit." "So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another” (Rom. 12:5). "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one Body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles...” (I Cor. 12:13). "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek,...for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:26-28). "For He is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;...That he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby” (Eph. 2:14,16).

(Vs.15-16)…Paul emphasizes not only the fact that man cannot be justified by the law, but that even saving faith is but the response to "the faith of Christ,” who made the sinner's justification possible. Both are necessary, but one (man’s faith) is dependent and secondary to the other (the faith of Christ). The "faith of Christ" is referred to several times in Paul’s writings. I believe that were the "faith of Christ" given greater emphasis in our preaching, more people would exercise "faith in Christ," both for salvation and spiritual blessing.

1. "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by THE 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.” (vs. 16)
2. “But the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise, by FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST, might be given to them that believe” (Gal. 3:22). The Scriptures had long ago concluded all under sin (Psa. 53:2,3). The point here is that since man could not accomplish his own redemption, the Scriptures concluded all under sin so that the thing promised might be given to believers by the “faith of Christ," i.e., His perfect fidelity. That this phrase does not refer to man's faith in Christ is evident from the fact that man's faith in Him is referred to in a separate phrase at the end of the verse: "them that believe”. Those who "believe" receive redemption by, or on the basis of His "faith," or fidelity. This is another way of saying that our salvation is based on what Christ has done and what He is. Thus our faith in Christ, necessary as it is to salvation, must always be secondary to "the faith of Christ." We can place our trust in Him only because He is so infinitely trustworthy.
3. With regard to the righteousness which believers possess in the sight of God, Paul places great emphasis on the fact that this is given as a free gift because of the fidelity of Christ, not because we proved true to God. "But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested...even the righteousness of God which is by FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST.” (Romans 3:21,22) And to emphasize the fact that he is not referring to my faith in Christ, but to Christ's faithfulness, he then adds: "unto all and upon all them that believe.” We can conclude that Christ's "faith" (fidelity) and man's faith are complementary. Those who "believe" are "...justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (vs. 24).

4. "And be found in Him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the FAITH OF CHRIST...” (Phil. 3:9). Who could have been more zealous of the law than Paul? Who could have lived more blamelessly in its sight? Yet it probed beneath the surface and condemned him to death as a vile sinner. He saw that he could not stand before God in his own false righteousness, but only in that true righteousness offered to the sinner by the faith, the fidelity, of Christ and appropriated by faith in Christ.
5. "In whom we have boldness and access with confidence BY THE FAITH OF HIM.” (Eph. 3:12) The feeble faith with which we enter the presence of God is but a response to "the faith of Christ." It is “by Him" that "we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand” (Rom. 5:2).
6. "...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.” (Gal. 2:20) How believers need to learn this truth! We are kept, while in the flesh, not by "our faith" but by His faithfulness. Our God-given faith is but the channel through which we appreciate and enjoy His never-failing faithfulness. "For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” (Rom. 5:10).

(Vs. 17-21)… Peter, in separating from the Gentile believers, was building again something that he had helped to destroy, something which God Himself had destroyed - "the middle wall of partition" between believing Jews and Gentiles (Eph. 2:14). The Jewish believers at Jerusalem, including Peter, had recognized that the Gentile believers were brethren in Christ, but then Peter had actually rebuilt this wall again and separated himself. "For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God” (vs. 19). That is why the apostle goes on in Galatians 2:20: "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”. Does not that fully pay my debt of sin - that agony and blood at Calvary when the Creator died for me the creature? Does not that fully justify me before God? Does not that explain Ephesians 1:6 where Paul said that we have been "accepted in the beloved"? Does not that explain Colossians 2:10 where he pronounced us "complete in Christ"? Does not that explain Romans 6:14 where he said that sin shall not have dominion over us? Why? Because we are "crucified," we are dead. We have died to sin and the law. We are not under law, but under grace. This is what Paul fought for at Antioch and Jerusalem. Are you not glad that he fought this battle for you? Therefore, we do not stand in the way of grace but let it have free course and say with Paul: "I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain” (Gal. 2:21).