Superficial Believers

I don't know what the percentage is, but I dare say that evangelical churches are filled with superficial believers. They live only to experience spiritual "highs." In seeking for good feelings, they have missed the truly joyful, happy, satisfying life. Make no mistake about it, there are wonderful feelings in the Christian life, but they are found only in knowing and obeying God's truth. True happiness comes as John McArthur describes it as the product of a "humble pursuit of God's truth and will and of conformity to it."

The first century had their share of such believers too. Paul speaks of them in Galatians 3:1-5. "O foolish Galatians!" (Gal. 3:1) "Are ye so foolish?" (3:3) "Foolish" is such a harsh word! But the Apostle was not calling them stupid. The word that he used here means "no mind" or "no understanding." The Galatian saints failed to use their spiritual intelligence when faced by the unscriptural, gospel-destroying teaching of the Judaizers. They were not using their heads. They were lazy! They had foolishly fallen into Judaistic legalism because they had stopped believing and applying the basic truths of the gospel that Paul had taught them and by which they had been saved.

We are neither saved nor sanctified in the Christian life on the basis of good feelings or attractive inclinations. Both are on the basis of God's truth in Christ. Christians who rely on self-oriented emotions instead of Scripture-oriented minds are doomed to be "tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive." (Eph. 4:14). When they judge an idea on the basis of how good it makes them feel or how nice it sounds rather than on the basis of its harmony with God's Word, they are in serious spiritual danger.

Questions to Ponder:
1. What do you think attracts most people to cults: (1) They are intellectually convinced the doctrines of the cult are true. (2) They find its teachings and practices appealing. Support your answer.
2. Does Paul's appeal to the Roman saints in Rom. 12:1-2 apply to "foolish" saints today? How?

Justification by Faith Alone

Twice Paul describes the Galatian saints as "foolish" in the space of three verses (Gal. 3:1, 3). A. T. Robertson, a Greek scholar, defined that word as "without sense" or understanding. In Romans 1:14, 21 Paul uses this term in speaking of pagans. How, then, does he speak of Christians as being without sense? Sometimes we believers can be so influenced by the world that we think like them, or as in this case, we don't understand the basics of Christianity like them. This is tragic! The confusion in Paul's day - and in ours - is over justification by faith.

Justification is one of the great benefits for trusting in Jesus Christ for salvation. It is a forensic term and envisions a courtroom with God as the Judge. The Bible often speaks of God as judge. To name a few, Abraham called Him "Judge of all the earth" (Gen. 18:25) and Paul called Him "the righteous Judge" (2 Tim. 4:8). Here is where the problems over this doctrine begin because people question how a holy God can announce a sinner righteous. Charles Ryrie (Basic Theology, p. 299) points out that there are only three options for God as sinners stand in His courtroom. He must condemn them, compromise His own righteousness to receive them as they are, or He can change them into righteous people. And if He does the last one, then He can announce them righteous, which is justification. However, Ryrie clarifies, "any righteousness the sinner has must be actual, not fictitious; real, not imagined; acceptable by God's standards, and not a whit short." Here's how God did it; it's all found in Galatians. We will be safeguarded from such confusion if we remember these. (1) His plan centered in Jesus Christ, not in human work (2:16). (2) The prerequisite is faith in the now-revealed Jesus Christ (2:16). (3) The price is the blood of Christ (2:21), a great cost to Him but a free gift to us. (4) The position established for the believer is union with Christ. This is what makes him righteous (2:20). And (5) the pronouncement is righteousness for the sinner who believes in Christ (3:6).

Questions to Ponder:
1. How does Paul's appeal in 3:1-5 validate what he argued for in 2:15-16?
2. What "Christian" rules seem to be important in your circles? Why?

What Makes Christianity Tick

Martin Luther stood alone, like the Apostle Paul, valiantly defending the great doctrine of justification by faith, the doctrine which is at the core of Christianity. He defined a Christian as, “not somebody who has no sin, but somebody against whom God no longer chalks sin, because of his faith in Christ. This doctrine brings comfort to consciences in serious trouble.”

Paul's defence over the same issue took place some 1500 years before Luther. Paul "withstood him [the Apostle Peter] to the face" (Gal. 2:11). There was no unity here. No peace! But Paul was not the problem, though he instigated the troublous moment. It was Peter and he had to be rebuked! His behavior of separating from fellow believers on the basis of race was totally disconcerting to Gentile believers and, I might add, very dishonoring to the Lord. Paul uses the pronoun "I" twice, once in reference to Peter (2:18) and the other, to himself (2:19). In the first he points out Peter's problem of building again by his behavior what he destroyed (a legal system for approaching God). He knew better. He was saved by faith alone in Christ, not by keeping the Law - just like the Gentiles. In the second, in his own person, Paul gives us an excellent description of the mysterious life of a believer. He is crucified, and yet he lives. At the time of His salvation he was united to Jesus Christ, who now lives within the saint. The old man is crucified (Rom. 6:6), but the new man is living; he is dead to the world, and dead to the law, and yet alive to God and Christ; sin is mortified, and grace quickened. What Paul contended for is what we must today. Justification (being declared righteous by God our Judge) by faith alone makes no sense to most people. Surely, they say, we must do something about sins that remain in our lives! Paul answers this more as we will see in our continuing study of the rest of Galatians. For now he points out that he is avoiding two great difficulties:

1. That he did not frustrate the grace of God, which the doctrine of the justification by the works of the law did. "And if by grace, then is it no more of works." (Rom. 11:6)
2. That he did not frustrate the death of Christ, whereas, if righteousness come by the law, then it must follow that Christ has died in vain. Why should He be appointed to die, if we might have been saved without it?

Contending? or Contentious?

A collision happened in the early church in Antioch of Syria. It's a collision that has happened time and time again between people who disagree. In that case (Gal. 2:11) two of the most outstanding apostles, Peter and Paul, did battle. Paul states, "But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed." In doing so Paul was entering on dangerous territory because many others in history had tried to do battle with their fellows, only to fail. Proverbs 26:21 reminds us that "as charcoal is to burning coals, and wood to fire, so is a contentious man to kindle strife." Those “who stir up dissension among brothers” (Proverbs 6:19) are on the same list of things the Lord hates. Contentious hearts look for things to criticize and for opportunities to tear down a person, program, or idea. They destroy the essential commodities of happy and productive relationships, i.e. trust, thinking the best of others, and loving attitudes. It’s no wonder that Paul warned the Christians in Galatia about the danger of this kind of talk. He wrote, “If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other” (Galatians 5:15). We need to watch our attitudes with others. But Paul was doing just that and he entered into battle in order to restore Peter. Peter's compromise needed rebuke and Paul gave it. God is at work, even in the most trying circumstances; what could have been a tragedy, He used for His glory and for the strengthening of His church. By this Paul was our example of his exhortation in Galatians 6:1, "Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness, considering theyself, lest thou also be tempted."

Defending the Faith, A Risky Business

Life is full of risks. We take risks from the moment we step out of our bed. We take a risk when we decide on a marriage partner. We take a risk when we grow children. We take risks when we get in our car and hit the roads. Without risks we would never make progress. An old Chinese saying states, "He who stands all day on one leg never goes anywhere." Buffalo Bill said, "I had many enemies among the Sioux; I would be running considerable risk in meeting them." But meet them he must. The same was true with Paul who preached a pure gospel of grace. He would not allow for any legal rule to be added to the gospel. As such, the gospel became available to both Jew and Gentile alike. The old faithful Jews did not readily accept that new gospel. They claimed that God's people must keep the ceremonial law. Except for a two-week period when he became acquainted with the apostles Peter and James in Jerusalem, Paul did not go to that city for 14 years aftter his conversion. It took special instructions from the Lord by revelation (Gal. 2:2) for him to go as a representative to the Jerusalem Council. But when he went Paul took a risk by choosing Titus, an uncircumcised Gentile who was now a Christian, to accompany him But notice Paul's actions. He was so very-well balanced. A Christian who is willing to take risks does not mean that he is care-free. He should be directed by the Lord and act in a well-balanced way. Paul was fair with the apostles by laying out the gospel as he understood it and preached it (Gal. 2:2); he was also wise in that he asked for a private meeting with the apostles (Gal. 2:2). A public meeting with such a sensitive issue would have been a needless offense. Brothers and sisters, we need to be willing to take risks under God's leadership, but in doing so to be fair and wise in all we do.

Questions to Ponder:
1. How do you feel when your beliefs are contrary to popular opinion? What would you have done in Paul's place?
2. Would it matter to you if Paul's argument had failed? Why or why not?

One Truth, One Church

Unity is of crucial importance to God. It exists in the Godhead; it exists in the church universal; it exists in the gospel. But the unity of the apostolic gospel in Paul's day was under attack. Judaizers, false teachers who stirred up trouble in the Gentile churches, taught that besides the gospel that the apostles in Jerusalem preached, there was another that Paul should be preaching to the Gentiles. They claimed that the Gentiles needed to go beyond mere faith in Christ crucified. They needed also to observe the Law of Moses just like faithful Jews would. In Galatians 2:1-10 Paul recounts an incident that was critical over this issue. It took place in a council in Jerusalem about 14 years after Paul was saved. The gospel of grace that he and the apostles preached was carefully examined. Both Paul and the apostles in Jerusalem had already had tremendous and effectual ministries among the Gentiles and Jews. There was a happy ending to that council because it was determined that two gospels did not exist - only one. How important that is! Again, in another passage, Paul emphasized unity when he encouraged the Ephesian saints to practice it in their assembly. The basis for their unity is the same basis for ours, i.e. the unity found in God, the church and the gospel. He said, "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) It is fashionable today to speak of the theologies of the New Testament - the Pauline, the Lukan, the Johannine, the Petrine. The implication is that there are fundamental differences between them. This passage from Galatians teaches us that the only difference was in the audiences. The Jews may have been circumcised already but that did not give them an edge on salvation. The apostles in Jerusalem preached the gospel to Jews and they who believed were set free from the bondage of the Law. Paul preahced to the Gentiles and they who believed, though not circumcised, were promised heaven simply on the basis of grace. They were not obligated to live after the Law that could not save any one. How thankful we can be!

Questions to Ponder:
1. Do you think Paul would find modern Christian rules more justifiable than the Jewish ones he opposed? Why or why not?
2. Suppose God called you to share the gospel with people of a different culture. How would you decide which American Christian practices could be abandoned and which could not?

Story-Telling and a Hostile Crowd

I forget who said it but someone was referring to controversy when he stated, "No matter what you say or write, there is no controversy until someone does not agree with you.” It is to our benefit that Judaizers did not agree with Paul for now we can learn from the controversy over salvation by grace or by human works. Paul deals with his antagonists in three different way, each one being a way we should use when people disagree with us. In Galatians 1-2 he answers them personally, with stories from his own experiences; in chapters 3-4, doctrinally; and in chapters 5-6, practically. Since our thoughts have brought us to Gal. 1:10-24 we should note his story-telling practice. Personal stories have a particular charm because they cannot be refuted by a hostile crowd. We might call the stories our personal testimony. Every believer has a unique testimony that he should use over and over as he witnesses to people. This is particularly useful with those who may otherwise disagree with our message. Jesus used story-telling amny times to his hostile audiences. See Luke 15, the parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin and the lost son, where Jesus thus exposed the hypocrisy of those who criticized his association with the lost. Peter used story-telling in Acts 11 to defend his action in speaking the gospel to Gentiles (Acts 10). Paul uses it here in Gal. 1:13-24. He speaks of his pre-conversion days (1:13-14)and states the obvious, i.e. that he did not learn salvation by grace alone through his commitment to legalistic Judaism. At the time of his conversion (1:15-16a) God revealed the risen Jesus to him (v. 12; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:8; Phil. 3:12) and he learned that salvation was by grace alone. His story continues because after his conversion (Gal. 1:16-24) he "conferred not with flesh and blood." Rather, Jesus Christ was his sole teacher during a period of three years in both Arabia and Damascus and he learned that salvation was by grace alone. When people disagree with your message, try story-telling, your own personal testimony.

Questions to Ponder:
1. If you had to argue for the reality of the gospel by giving one example of how faith in Christ has changed you, what would you share?
2. In what way is your experience of Christ an important part of your witness to others?

Fight the Good Fight but Watch Your Attitude

Paul is an apologist - a defender of the faith. In fact, he is probably the apologist par excellence of all church history. The book of Galatians is one apologetic document that came from his pen. Every serious Christian should focus on this wonderful work. We can learn much about how to defend the faith just by studying it. For example, it becomes obvious that Paul's defence of the faith was never meant to do what only the Holy Spirit can do, namely bring people under conviction of "sin, righteousness and judgment" (John 16:8-11). It is basically meant to strengthen believers. For sure, it is never meant to win an argument against an unbeliever. Josh McDowell stated, "Apologetics is not for proving the Word of God but simply for providing a basis for faith." (Evidence That Demands a Verdict, p. iii). McDowell makes the amazing observation that though the majority of those to whom he has spoken did not deny his evidence, they did not accept Christ as Savior and Lord. "This is not because they were unable to believe - they were simply unwilling to believe." (op.cit.p. i) In Galatians 1:10 Paul showed a right attitude in approaching people with the evidence concerning the truth of Christianity. We need to watch our attitude. Then in verses 11-12 he spoke to the Galatian saints who had been troubled by the Judaizers who claimed to be the true Christians. They had been influenced by suggestions that he made up his own gospel. In another article we shall see where this all went.

Questions to Ponder:
1. Why do you think Paul focused on helping the saints in the Galatian churches rather than on the unbelieving Judaizers? Was this a departure from his normal evangelistic outreach?
2. How has evidence for the truth of Christianity affected you?