|
I found this book quite interesting, in that Paul gives us some insight into the conflict he had with the other men who were trying to lead the then-new Christian religion. His attitude of his own inerrancy in matters of doctrine is quite revealing, in my opinion. He also makes an effort to discredit some of the other members of the ruling group - by insisting that he was the only reliable source for doctrinal matters. Other than his claim of personal experience, though, he shows no evidence to suport his claim.
Gal 1:6-9 - I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the
one who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a
different gospel- not that there is another gospel, but there are
some who are confusing you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.
But even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you a
gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that one be
accursed! As we have said before, so now I repeat, if anyone
proclaims to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let that one
be accursed!
Well, Paul starts off pretty quickly on his
primary mission of making sure that his personal brand of
Christianity has the upper hand! I expect that the other leaders who
were set against Paul also said the same thing. Who was to decide
which "exclusive" version was correct? Obviously, none of the
believers, since Paul was having such a hard time keeping people in
line with his version.
Gal 1:15-17 - But when God, who had set me apart before I was born
and called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me,
so that I might proclaim him among the Gentiles, I did not confer
with any human being, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were
already apostles before me, but I went away at once into Arabia, and
afterwards I returned to Damascus.
I read this and thought, "Well, that explains
it!" Paul went off on his own to make up his own theology and didn't
bother to ask anyone for any advice. No wonder his thoughts on the
Christian religion were so far different from the people who actually
followed Jesus! I also found it quite interesting that Paul went east
to do his thinking, into the area of Arabia, where he presumably came
into contact with all sorts of oriental religious ideas!
Gal 2:1-5 - Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem
with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up in response to a
revelation. Then I laid before them (though only in a private meeting
with the acknowledged leaders) the gospel that I proclaim among the
Gentiles, in order to make sure that I was not running, or had not
run, in vain. But even Titus, who was with me, was not compelled to
be circumcised, though he was a Greek. But because of false believers
secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy on the freedom we have in
Christ Jesus, so that they might enslave us- we did not submit to
them even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might always
remain with you.
Clearly, after fourteen years of running around
with his own version of the Christian message, Paul had some pretty
fundamental differences with Peter, James and the whole original
crew. Paul decided to put the best light he could on the conflict -
accusing unnamed "false believers" for his difficulties, rather than
naming the people he had real problems with - the founders of the
church. This was a pretty shrewd political move on Paul's part -
considering the fact that he was writing to a group of people who had
virtually no contact with the principal parties involved.
Gal 2:11,12 - But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to
his face, because he stood self-condemned; for until certain people
came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But after they
came, he drew back and kept himself separate for fear of the
circumcision faction.
Here, Paul tells more of the friction between
himself and Peter, and accuses Peter of cowardice in the face of
political hardships.
Gal 2:15,16 - We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile
sinners; yet we know that a person is justified not by the works of
the law but through faith in Jesus Christ. And we have come to
believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by faith in
Christ, and not by doing the works of the law, because no one will be
justified by the works of the law.
This statement puts Paul at odds with James, in
particular, and even Jesus as quoted in the first three gospels, both
of whom said that salvation involves not only faith, but actions.
Paul's teaching is distinctly different from this - implying that he
disagreed with even what Jesus said on the matter!
Gal 3:15-17 - Brothers and sisters, I give an example from daily
life: once a person's will has been ratified, no one adds to it or
annuls it. Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his
offspring; it does not say, "And to offsprings," as of many; but it
says, "And to your offspring," that is, to one person, who is Christ.
My point is this: the law, which came four hundred thirty years
later, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to
nullify the promise.
It looks like Paul fancied himself as a lawyer
(and I think some people believe that the group known as Pharisees
were not much short of the mark), however, he is dead wrong here.
Please read Genesis,
and the many times God talked about covenants with Abraham. The
promises made are clearly talking about all of Abraham's descendants
having eternal possession of a chunk of land. Paul builds his
argument on a foundation of pure air and vapor. Add to this the fact
that the promises were for all descendants, without any reservation,
and I think it would be best for Paul to not bring up this particular
subject.
Gal 3:24-26 - Therefore the law was our disciplinarian until
Christ came, so that we might be justified by faith. But now that
faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian, for in
Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith.
This pretty well sums up the problem with the
Christian view of morality. Paul says there's no need to be subect to
a disciplinarian, which to my mind means there's no need for
discipline. No matter what you do, you'll still be considered saved -
meaning there's no action bad enough to keep you out of heaven. Give
me elightened
self-interest any day!
Gal 4:4,5 - But when the fullness of time had come, God sent his
Son, born of a woman, born under the law, in order to redeem those
who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as
children.
In reading the gospels, we find that Jesus
claimed to be above the laws on several occasions. This means that
there is another contradiction between Paul and Jesus.
Gal 5:2-4 - Listen! I, Paul, am telling you that if you let
yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you. Once
again I testify to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he
is obliged to obey the entire law. You who want to be justified by
the law have cut yourselves off from Christ; you have fallen away
from grace.
More insights into the controversy in the early
church over the sexual mutilation ceremony of Judaism. I thought Paul
had earlier said that faith was the only determinant for salvation.
It seems to me that any action taken after establishing that faith
would be acceptable. Here, Paul states that one could lose one's
standing with God. Of course, this looks more like an emotional
reaction to his political struggle for dominance, rather than a well
thought-out stance.
Gal 5:13-16 - For you were called to freedom, brothers and
sisters; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for
self-indulgence, but through love become slaves to one another. For
the whole law is summed up in a single commandment, "You shall love
your neighbor as yourself." If, however, you bite and devour one
another, take care that you are not consumed by one another. Live by
the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh.
Of course, Paul earlier said that believers had
no need of a disciplinarian. Now, he tries to take on the role of one
himself, not realizing the hypocracy of his statement.
Gal 5:18-21 - But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not
subject to the law. Now the works of the flesh are obvious:
fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmities,
strife, jealousy, anger, quarrels, dissensions, factions, envy,
drunkenness, carousing, and things like these. I am warning you, as I
warned you before: those who do such things will not inherit the
kingdom of God.
As we wrap up the book, we once again see Paul
contradicting himself, now saying that if any believer does any of
these things, they won't get into heaven, regardless of their
beliefs. Note that his list of unforgivable actions include being
angry and disagreeing with fellow believers. Considering some of the
things I've read just in this letter, I think that lets Paul out,
too!