For Paul this letter is personal. And he is angry. In this opening section, beginning in vs. 1 and through the second half of chapter two, he skips his normal Thanksgiving and goes straight to a rebuke that’s challenging, and seemingly hard to apply. I want to be honest with you. Paul speaks harshly, at times. I might even argue too harshly. But that’s not meant to suggest that he’s wrong or that he has no reason to do so. No – because it’s people who are being harmed and not simply ideas that are at stake. I’ve found myself a few times in similar circumstances where I experienced a holy anger at a message that distorted the gospel and hurt people. In one instance, I was at a funeral for a woman who died from terrible cancer at the age of 56. Her well-meaning pastor in the eulogy talked about how she was such a “good Christian” because she never doubted and never asked why. She was praised for suffering quietly without any complaint. I danced in my seat with agitation for what these people were hearing was not the gospel of grace and unconditional love from a God who rescued us but a presentation of “stiff-upper-lip Christianity” which stifles any expression of questions, pain, or grace. It places the weight of faith on what we do rather than on the one who frees us. One of my revelations as a pastor later in life has been that often good theology doesn’t do too much. But bad theology - bad theology destroys lives, wounds souls, kills. We should always be angry when people’s lives are at stake. What stands out to me in our passage this morning are Paul’s two broad, interlocking components: 1) protect the gospel for the sake of people; 2) defend yourself for the sake of the gospel.
1. Protect the gospel for the sake of people.
It’s not your little “t” theologies, not your musical preferences, not your opinions. They’re important. They matter. But they don’t rise to the intensity of language and concern that Paul will take. On the one hand, in the Covenant, we have said that there is much that we can disagree on, hold differences with, and still maintain our unity, and our love. On the other hand, we must always remember that, according to Scripture, some things are worth fighting about and for. The gospel is one of those things. It’s our center, our hope, the very revelation of Jesus. To get that wrong isn’t meaningless. It harms others. But what are we protecting? According to Paul, what is the gospel and what should we protect it from?
The gospel – vss. 3-5 – 3 Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, 4 who gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, 5 to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. A few notes:
It’s a joint “rescue operation” from God and Jesus. There is no mention of God’s judgment, God’s wrath, or even punishment; rather the gospel discussed rescues us from our sins and from this “evil age” – and this is God’s will, it’s what God wants. Both work in tandem.
Not from the future but from the “present” – that the gospel was to be an experience in the present and offer transformation now and not simply later and connects to a web of relationships in real time.
But we also learn that the gospel can be “perverted.” The word in Greek, metastrepho literally means to make something it’s opposite, vss. 6-9 – this anti-gospel was one in which followers of Jesus were required to be circumcised and keep the Jewish law in order to be made right with God. For Paul this perversion was wrong because it disturbed and enslaved people rather than freeing them. In this case, by relying upon their own effort and by requiring things that Jesus’ never did.
Paul will call his opponents “false believers” and say that they are promoting a “different gospel which is really no good news at all” (vss. 6-7) which is strong language – stronger than what I would ever wish to use but even more challenging is what made them so. In fact, there is a deep irony in what Paul is saying. It wasn’t because they were too welcoming but because they were too exclusionary adding extra requirements. It wasn’t because they were unbiblical, or in any way morally lax, but because they were not reading the Bible with Jesus at the center nor interested in widening the family to include new brothers and sisters (particularly who were gentile); they wanted to restrict access and lock people out. They wanted to add something more than Jesus and we still do that today. There must be no “Jesus and . . .” no matter how biblical or moral it is.
For Paul, the gospel must be the personal experience of freedom from but also freedom for (it is freedom from sin, oppression, fear, social, ethnic and sexual identities, as well as the law) but not because Judaism or the law was bad. It’s like getting braces on your teeth and then having those braces removed. Braces (the law) are challenging and can even hurt but are not the problem. The misalignment of your teeth is the actual problem, the braces were a temporary solution but now there’s a better one. This is important because it’s necessary to understand that freedom from sin and brokenness aims to free you “for” by transforming your life so that you can “serve one another humbly in love” (5:13). However, let’s be very clear. It's not about “freedom from the Old Testament.” Yes, the OT must now be interpreted through the lens of the gospel – what God alone has done for our salvation through Jesus Christ – but Paul will protect the gospel from his detractors by utilizing the Hebrew Bible, which was the only Bible at the time. So the Hebrew Bible, according to Paul, was inspired and authoritative for believers. The issue is interpretation, particularly with respect to the law. We are no longer covenantally required to obey the law and its demands but look to it and the whole of the OT primarily as wisdom and the promise redemption of what God did in Jesus Christ. This is where Paul can be so helpful. He’s going to show us how to read the Hebrew Bible in light of Jesus and (spoiler alert) – he’s not a literalist.
We’re going to keep coming back to this point and we will see that Paul’s letter is a reeducation of the “true gospel” in which Jesus is the center, with nothing added, the cross is the metaphor, freedom is the goal, and love is the evidence.
2. Defend yourself for the sake of the gospel
The rival teachers that Paul is calling out apparently devised a strategy to win over the Galatian Christians through theological and Biblical arguments but also by attacking Paul personally. But here’s the point. Their personal attack didn’t merely malign Paul but challenged the truth of the gospel. They sought to undermine Paul by persuading them that he was a phony apostle. So Paul isn’t bragging for the sake of pride. His reputation links directly to the point he’s making. If you were a physician trying to get people to understand that wearing masks would stop a virus from spreading and others were challenging that perspective by maligning your medical degree. You, too, would seek to shore up your reputation precisely because mask-wearing saves lives. This section is highly contextual. It’s bound to a culture and perspective that doesn’t neatly fit our time or location. BUT it is fundamentally about, “Who do you trust and what are they saying?” And that is an incredibly relevant question for us. At a time when anyone can say anything with the authority of God himself on a platform that is more global than Paul could have ever imagined– this question is critical. So how does Paul defend himself and how might we borrow from him? We must be careful, however, that we don’t confuse any healthy criticism of our attitudes, actions, or beliefs, as the same thing that Paul is experiencing. One of the terrors of Biblical interpretation is when we rightly read the Scripture and apply it to the wrong context. So I am going to briefly reconstruct Paul’s defense of himself and ask for you to thoughtfully and carefully apply it to yourself. Bear in mind – that Paul cares because reputation, in this instance, has everything to do with the gospel and people. This will be made all the more plain next week when we see the first real showdown between Paul and an odd opponent, the Apostle Peter himself.
First, Paul tells the Galatians that he is and has always been a “doulos of God” – literally “a slave” and not a pleaser of people. Given our context one might say follower/ally/agent of Christ.” Whatever word we choose should highlight attention on loyalty to Jesus and our voluntary desire to follow his lead, do what he does, and assume that he’s in charge, without compulsion. Paul’s point is straightforward. One beholden of looking good to people is preoccupied with pleasing people, a follower or student of Christ is passionately committed to pleasing Christ. In other words, evidence for correctness is the freedom of Christlikeness.
Second, Paul speaks of a community – vs. 2 (which include gentiles like Titus) – Paul points out that he’s not acting solely on his own but has others to speak on his behalf. Importantly, many of those, like Titus, are gentles from the community under discussion, who are being wounded. A good rule of thumb for engaging any discussion: Don’t speak on an issue or about others if you don’t have a community that includes the (dis)affected. Don’t talk about the Christianity and racism without including BIPOC people in the mix. Don’t talk about the Bible and homosexuality without including gay Christians in the discussion. Don’t speak of loving your neighbor without a community that includes the powerless and put upon. Otherwise, it’s a discussion that offers only echoes of what the majority or powerful already believe.
Third, Paul seeks to tell an honest story of transformation that praises God. He will name his own weaknesses and sin. For example, he will admit to having been a people pleaser in the past (“if I were still trying to please people” (vs. 10). He will admit to savagely persecuting the church (vs. 13) but will also talk about a personal transformation that gives glory to God. Friends, do you want to defend the gospel? Then, listen to Paul, and do so with a surrendered, Spirit-filled life that demonstrates change because of Jesus and gives glory to God. All other arguments pale in comparison.
Finally, Paul will cautiously honor those with authority. This is a difficult dance and not one where Paul will always succeed. In fact, we will see that in our next passage – Paul will have to call out Peter – the top dog of all apostles for his behavior which places the gospel in jeopardy. He will acknowledge that he has been vetted to make sure that he was correct and will at least begrudgingly acknowledge that some are “pillars” but fundamentally understands that authority isn’t merely isn’t due to a title or role but is subject to the gospel itself. And when Peter fails to follow that Gospel and actually harms other believers, Paul will have no hesitation to call him out.
One last story of a gospel in jeopardy. When I was a professor two of my students got married. I was so excited to go to their wedding – I love weddings and like the Apostle Paul believe that they are one of clearest examples of the gospel and our relationship with Jesus. But in this instance, it turned out not to be so. During the wedding, the well-meaning pastor did something that to this day leaves me fired up. He celebrated communion and gave only the elements to the Bride and groom. We weren’t invited to partake. We weren’t invited to share. We were by all accounts excluded from a meal of love to which we were all invited and asked to watch. And I was astonished at the distortion – that we were being denied what was ours by grace. This table is for all: no reservation needed, no dress code required, no entrance denied, no bouncer employed. This is the gospel (we move to Communion).
No comments:
Post a Comment