Galations

The New Covenant made the laws in the Torah null and void, and Paul was pointing out how combining the two was like mixing oil and water. Which is why Messianic Judaism never really made much sense to me.

Its difficult to say that all OT law was voided, some carried over into the NT but it was not just commands but is more like a way of thinking. If the law wasn't carried over into the NC then no one would be convicted of sin and would not need Grace. This law is about how to love and its about holiness and godliness too. It shows us what we must repent of and what we should follow, meditate on and pray about, it shows us how to yield to Christ.

To me holiness is about love for God.

TamaraLynne said:

Why did Paul not want the gentiles to go by the laws of the Jews? He said it would put them in bondage

Click to expand...

Galatians is a great epistle, but to grasp it one needs to understand what was going on, so I am not surprised you're a little confused.

Paul wants to remind the gentile converts that one is marked out as belonging to the family of God by faith, not by works of the law, by this is meant being circumcised, observing the food laws and keeping the sabbath. Paul's point is that, a good as they are, they belong to the pre-Christ period, now Christ has come faith is what matters, hence he uses the illustration of Abraham in Rom. 4.

A great easy to read commentary on Galatians is this one by Tom Wright. If you would rather some free resources try The Letter to the Galatians: Exegesis and Theology.

TamaraLynne said:

In the book of Galations I was reading and saw that it was a letter to a church and the church started with the gentiles and when Paul went away then others who were Jews or Jews who became Christian? came to the church and told the gentile believers that they needed to do the old testament laws in order to have the promises of Abraham...but Paul said this was putting the gentiles in bondage and he warned them.

What I want to know did the Jews who became Christian still have to go by the laws because it would have been to difficult for them and they would think they were sinning by not going by the law..so they continued in their traditions?


Not to mention I'm a bit confused...when the bible says law....are their two laws...one from the old covenant and the new one from the new covenant?
Why did Paul not want the gentiles to go by the laws of the Jews? He said it would put them in bondage

Click to expand...

I think these couple of verses sum it up pretty good.

Galatians 2:14-17

King James Version (KJV)

14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
16 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.
17 But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.

InSpiritInTruth said:

I think these couple of verses sum it up pretty good.

Galatians 2:14-17

King James Version (KJV)

14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
16 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.
17 But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.

Click to expand...

^This You can even go back and compare the language Paul uses in Galations and to the Acts incident where those who believed (who went out from them) teaching what the apostles said they did not. Paul wraps all of it into Galations very nicely.

The yoke of bondage (Shown in both Acts 15:10 & Gal 5:1) Along with those that trouble you with words (Shown in Acts 15:24 & Gal 1:7, & Gal 5:12). The law of Moses and the circumcision issue (Shown in Acts 15:1 & Gal 5:2) The grace of the Lord Jesus in contrast to their words (Shown in Acts 15:11 & Gal 5:4) They speak in accord with the same wording and Paul hits the same (point by point) using the same wording surrounding that issue.

In Gal 1:7 he speaks to the same thing as shown in the counsel in Acts, "some that trouble you". The certain ones (which went out) in Acts preached were saying "except ye be circumcised and keep Moses ye cannot be saved" thus (as James said) these "trouble you with words" subverting their souls. So in Gal 1:6 Paul says...I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Whereas in Acts 15:11 shows the perverting of the gospel itself (because it was by those who believed) with ..."except ye be circumcised and keep Moses ye cannot be saved". And they respond.... But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

Then go into Gal 5:1 you can pick up what they were addressing in the counsel, or what they were adding to the necks of the disciples (which was circumcision and keeping the law of Moses). The apostles called it both tempting God and a yoke (in Acts 15:10) So he says the same to them in Gal 1:5 saying, Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Then he says... Gal 5:2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. Then right into Gal 4:5 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace (see Acts 15:5 too). All the way down (again) into where he speaks of they which trouble you in Gal 5:10 I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be. (see Gal 1:7 & Acts 15:24) So the same are troubling them.

I had posted this before, but I think there in Galations Paul did a great job showing the whole thing together by his choice of words. The yoke, the circumcision, the justification by the law (verses grace) and them which trouble you. Its another gospel (which is not another) though it has Jesus in it (its another Jesus) and of those which believed, but it wasn't by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

They were troubled, because this is presented as a saved issued. They were saying "except ye be circumcised and keep Moses ye cannot be saved", the apostles were like we said no such thing, its by grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Good post Fire.

Rev Randy said:

Good post Fire.

Click to expand...

Thanks bro

Fireinfolding said:

Thanks bro

Click to expand...

It was this passage that struck the bell of truth:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Rev Randy said:

It was this passage that struck the bell of truth:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Click to expand...

Yeah his wording is consistent with the counsel. Jesus said "he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved", whereas they went out on Moses, "except ye be circumcised and keep the law of Moses you cant be saved". The same contention seems to between these two... John 9:28 Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses' disciples. Which again would bring you to two, the law came by Moses by grace and truth came by Christ Jesus and what could be comparable between the two women of Abraham and the casting out the bondwaman, and that which gendereth to bondage, whereas Christ is the righteousness of God (now revealed) "without" the law, yet still testified of by the very law and prophets.

TamaraLynne said:

In the book of Galations I was reading and saw that it was a letter to a church and the church started with the gentiles and when Paul went away then others who were Jews or Jews who became Christian? came to the church and told the gentile believers that they needed to do the old testament laws in order to have the promises of Abraham...but Paul said this was putting the gentiles in bondage and he warned them.

What I want to know did the Jews who became Christian still have to go by the laws because it would have been to difficult for them and they would think they were sinning by not going by the law..so they continued in their traditions?

Not to mention I'm a bit confused...when the bible says law....are their two laws...one from the old covenant and the new one from the new covenant?
Why did Paul not want the gentiles to go by the laws of the Jews? He said it would put them in bondage

Click to expand...

From what I understand, it isn't two laws "per se" but rather one law, the Old Covenant, fulfilled by Christ. But Jews were not bound by the Old Covenant anywhere but in their minds, which is why Paul warned them of entering into bondage - with to me is basically the belief that we must work for our Salvation.

It is kind of a balance, though, because some have weak faith, and we are to receive them:
Romans 14:1-4 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

We have to find the balance between strengthening our own faith, working towards total freedom in Christ, and realizing that others must do that on their own.

This is why I get so frustrated when I see people being prideful in their knowledge of Scripture, or their belief that they are super-Spiritual. Because the thing is, as much as I feel we should be assured of our Salvation, and rest in that knowledge, we should also "fight the good fight of faith" so that in the end we can say we finished our course.

Fireinfolding said:

Yeah his wording is consistent with the counsel. Jesus said "he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved", whereas they went out on Moses, "except ye be circumcised and keep the law of Moses you cant be saved". The same contention seems to between these two... John 9:28 Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses' disciples. Which again would bring you to two, the law came by Moses by grace and truth came by Christ Jesus and what could be comparable between the two women of Abraham and the casting out the bondwaman, and that which gendereth to bondage, whereas Christ is the righteousness of God (now revealed) "without" the law, yet still testified of by the very law and prophets.

Click to expand...

Preach it sister.

TamaraLynne said:

In the book of Galations I was reading and saw that it was a letter to a church and the church started with the gentiles and when Paul went away then others who were Jews or Jews who became Christian? came to the church and told the gentile believers that they needed to do the old testament laws in order to have the promises of Abraham...

Click to expand...

Coming from a covenantalist view on this, I see things this way.
The Jews were teaching that Gentiles needed to keep the carnal command of the covenant of circumcision to take part in the covenant promises made to Abraham's seed. Circumcision in the foreskin of the flesh bound the natural seed to the covenant given at Sinai, as to be considered as one born in the land, and to have one law with the natural son's.
Ex 12:43 And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of the passover: There shall no stranger eat thereof:
44 But every man’s servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof.
45 A foreigner and an hired servant shall not eat thereof.
46 In one house shall it be eaten; thou shalt not carry forth ought of the flesh abroad out of the house; neither shall ye break a bone thereof.
47 All the congregation of Israel shall keep it. {keep … : Heb. do it}
48 And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof.
49 One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.

TamaraLynne said:

but Paul said this was putting the gentiles in bondage and he warned them.

Click to expand...

Ga 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

TamaraLynne said:

What I want to know did the Jews who became Christian still have to go by the laws because it would have been to difficult for them and they would think they were sinning by not going by the law..so they continued in their traditions?

Click to expand...

I believe the issue here is not the laws of the Sinai covenant which was important to Jewish believers. But the Abrahamic covenant, with it's promises. These in calling Gentiles to the faith of the new covenant, were continuing to keep the covenant made with their fathers, to shew forth that those promises were not abolished in Christ.
While unbelieving Jews were attempting to "transfer" all the promises of the covenant made in circumcision, to the covenant given to his seed at Sinai, believing Jews were preaching the promises available to Gentiles apart from the carnal commandment.
IMO, this has to do with the source of the blessings and promises. Did they come from the covenant given at Sinai, or were they in covenant before Sinai?
But even today, Israel even in their uncircumcised hearts, are in the land of their inheritance, by and through the covenant of circumcision which they keep.
Le 26:40 If they shall confess their iniquity, and the iniquity of their fathers, with their trespass which they trespassed against me, and that also they have walked contrary unto me;
41 And that I also have walked contrary unto them, and have brought them into the land of their enemies; if then their uncircumcised hearts be humbled, and they then accept of the punishment of their iniquity:
42 Then will I remember my covenant with Jacob, and also my covenant with Isaac, and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember; and I will remember the land.
43 The land also shall be left of them, and shall enjoy her sabbaths, while she lieth desolate without them: and they shall accept of the punishment of their iniquity: because, even because they despised my judgments, and because their soul abhorred my statutes.
44 And yet for all that, when they be in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, neither will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to break my covenant with them: for I am the LORD their God.
45 But I will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the heathen, that I might be their God: I am the LORD.

Note....We have died in Christ, he bore our punishment. He accepted our punishment for us. IMO, this is the wrath which John preached was coming and Christ was our escape.

TamaraLynne said:

Not to mention I'm a bit confused...when the bible says law....are their two laws...one from the old covenant and the new one from the new covenant?
Why did Paul not want the gentiles to go by the laws of the Jews? He said it would put them in bondage

Click to expand...

Read the above scriptures of lev. 26 in full. I think you can see that God's wrath is by the law given in the covenant at Sinai. But his covenant of Mercy in never forgetting his promises to their fathers, they are indeed loved. The Jewish apostles were indeed keeping that covenant of circumcision to show the truth of the gospel, in those promises are not abolished in Christ. Just my 02 cents.

Ge 17:5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.

And so he has.....

St. Paul recognized that the insistence of those who demanded that the Gentiles all be circumcised was only the first step. Afterwards those Gentiles would be required to keep all the laws that the Jews saw as necessary for their attaining eternal life. And we are not referring to 613 laws and commandments; we are referring to 10's of 1,000's of laws and commandments.

The original laws of Torah had one purpose, and that was to take a people who barely knew each other and mold a cohesive society out of them. By having a set of societal laws as the basis for that society so that everyone knew what their rights and responsibilites were such a society could be formed. And so long as they obeyed those laws their society grew and prospered. But they never saw those laws as a 'roadmap to heaven'; they saw them only as the mortar which held their society together.

By the time of Christ there were certain sects within Judaism which preached that there was an afterlife to be desired. However, those sects also knew that the laws of Torah as they were originally written were purely societal, rather than their being salvific. So in order to convert them from their original purpose into one that would enable people to earn eternal life they added other laws to the Mosaic Law in subsets. The Sabbath commandment alone had well over 1,000 laws in a subset attached to it, and in order to obey that one commandment in such a manner as to earn salvation, all 1,000+ laws in that subset had to be obeyed as well. That's why Jesus was constantly being criticized for healing on the Sabbath. It wasn't forbidden by the commandment as it was originally written, but it was forbidden by one or more of the laws in the subset attached to that commandment.

So when we read of certain members of the Jerusalem church pressuring Gentiles to obey 'the law', it is these 10's of 1,000's of laws which they were referring to, rather than its being simply the original 613 commandments. And that was due to the 'false prophets' paying only lipservice to Jesus' atoning sacrifice, while basing the means of attaining eternal life on the Gentiles' keeping this enormous number of laws perfectly. And that was an accomplishment which the Jews themselves had failed to do.

Harry3142 said:

St. Paul recognized that the insistence of those who demanded that the Gentiles all be circumcised was only the first step. Afterwards those Gentiles would be required to keep all the laws that the Jews saw as necessary for their attaining eternal life. And we are not referring to 613 laws and commandments; we are referring to 10's of 1,000's of laws and commandments.

The original laws of Torah had one purpose, and that was to take a people who barely knew each other and mold a cohesive society out of them. By having a set of societal laws as the basis for that society so that everyone knew what their rights and responsibilites were such a society could be formed. And so long as they obeyed those laws their society grew and prospered. But they never saw those laws as a 'roadmap to heaven'; they saw them only as the mortar which held their society together.

By the time of Christ there were certain sects within Judaism which preached that there was an afterlife to be desired. However, those sects also knew that the laws of Torah as they were originally written were purely societal, rather than their being salvific. So in order to convert them from their original purpose into one that would enable people to earn eternal life they added other laws to the Mosaic Law in subsets. The Sabbath commandment alone had well over 1,000 laws in a subset attached to it, and in order to obey that one commandment in such a manner as to earn salvation, all 1,000+ laws in that subset had to be obeyed as well. That's why Jesus was constantly being criticized for healing on the Sabbath. It wasn't forbidden by the commandment as it was originally written, but it was forbidden by one or more of the laws in the subset attached to that commandment.

So when we read of certain members of the Jerusalem church pressuring Gentiles to obey 'the law', it is these 10's of 1,000's of laws which they were referring to, rather than its being simply the original 613 commandments. And that was due to the 'false prophets' paying only lipservice to Jesus' atoning sacrifice, while basing the means of attaining eternal life on the Gentiles' keeping this enormous number of laws perfectly. And that was an accomplishment which the Jews themselves had failed to do.

Click to expand...

I think paul knew legalism was a slippery slope, and circumcision is insulting the Lord i think, and is a heavy burden. However hes not as hostile toward all law though, he wasn't rigid and intolerable because that's not wise, not loving, not mature or of faith and the Spirit. We can see this in Romans chapters 13-14, 1Co 9:4 and 1Co 10:31.


I just noticed something, i'll need to ponder it for a bit, maybe its nothing but it looks interesting. Thank you for making me post these scriptures. Praise the Lord


Ro 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

1Co 9:4 Have we not power to eat and to drink?

1Co 10:7 Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.

1Co 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

BrotherDC said:

I think paul knew legalism was a slippery slope, and circumcision is insulting the Lord i think, and is a heavy burden. However hes not as hostile toward all law though, he wasn't rigid and intolerable because that's not wise, not loving, not mature or of faith and the Spirit. We can see this in Romans chapters 13-14, 1Co 9:4 and 1Co 10:31.


I just noticed something, i'll need to ponder it for a bit, maybe its nothing but it looks interesting. Thank you for making me post these scriptures. Praise the Lord


Ro 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

1Co 9:4 Have we not power to eat and to drink?

1Co 10:7 Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.

1Co 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

Click to expand...

That one come from the context of Exodus 32 and God was more offended at it then each other there, don't you think?

Fireinfolding said:

That one come from the context of Exodus 32 and God was more offended at it then each other there, don't you think?

Click to expand...

Please expound sister, thank you.

BrotherDC said:

Please expound sister, thank you.

Click to expand...

I posted on it before, and I need to drop my car off at the mechanics shortly, but look at where he is referring to. The wording.

Exodus 32:6And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.

1Cr 10:7 Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.

But you would know its speaks of this same thing.