Booklet-The Book of Galatians – A Commentary

In his epistle to the churches of Galatia, the Apostle Paul sternly warns those who were turning away from the One who had called them in the grace of Christ to a DIFFERENT GOSPEL (Galatians 1:6). If someone—whether man or angel—comes along preaching a gospel different from the one the apostles preached, says Paul, “let him be ACCURSED” (verses 7–8). But just what was this “different gospel” Paul so strongly opposed?set” among the Jews, which was affecting Peter’s own behavior.

Therefore, by using the highest doctrinal authority, Paul highlights the importance of grace as a “master strategy” in his discourse to go beyond just criticizing the Jews to teach that obedience without the “faithfulness of Christ” and what He accomplished was meaningless.

Paul consistently says that the law was not void or meaningless but that their misapplication of it was. He knew that they incorrectly continued to “link” circumcision with the law and that Peter, knowing the truth of the matter, continued to tolerate this practice among them.  Paul was clearly using these arguments to back down the Jews from forcing circumcision upon the Gentile congregations and from seeing themselves as “better” for continuing in the practice. Paul clearly saw that physical circumcision apart from the law had become a “rite” or “essential cultural practice” of the Jews and was not to be forced upon other cultures. Paul was making that distinction. Paul consistentlyshows in his writings that the symbol of physical circumcision was no longer part of the law—but has been replaced by the more important spiritual “circumcision of the heart.”

A present-day controversy exists from this book arising from a misapplication of the context in Paul’s discourse. Paul is emphatically stating that one could obey laws or rituals forever, but if Christ had not come and been sacrificed we would never be justified and certainly not saved. Our works never justify us—rather it is God’s grace in giving us this supreme sacrifice that justifies us. Some suggest that Paul is teaching that grace stands apart from obedience and even invalidates it. Yet, Paul constantly speaks of the need to obey. They cite this book as proof of this “grace only” doctrine, rationalizing that

in his effort to shield the Gentile congregations from the practice of circumcision Paul is saying that the works of the law (especially circumcision) are not required and only grace stands. However, we do find in his writings that he makes a clear distinction that circumcision is no longer a part of the law. As such, the context of Paul’s discourse

is certainly appropriate in that it emphasizes grace, choosing this context in an effort to “teach the Jews” they were focusing on the wrong things. He was emphatically showing that clinging to the practice of circumcision as a “sign” of their “specialness” only serves to deemphasize what Christ had done for them. He was not teaching that obedience to the law of God was now meaningless because grace invalidated it. He was saying that the Jews needed to let go of forcing their customs and traditions on others  even though these same practices may indeed have once been required, as specifically these things now

had no standing in the New Covenant. He was saying that all men (and especially the Jews who resisted this) should focus on accepting what Christ fulfilled for them—what they could not fulfill for themselves. That is the case, and we shall see the evidence of these facts in this annotation of Paul’s letter to the Galatians.

Paul is first introduced to us as Saul of Tarsus, a man who persecuted Christian’s and was “consenting to the death of Stephen” (Acts 22:20). He knew very well the “religion of the Jews.” He had been taught by Gamaliel and was “highly placed” in that religion

(Galatians 1:14). But this (false) religion of the Jews was not the true religion taught by God through His Word but a perversion of it overseen by a corrupt Sanhedrin council which had adjudicated the very death of Jesus Christ. It was this perverted and apostate version of what the Jews practiced in that day that brought about rejection of

Christ and refusal to accept that He was truly the Son of God.

However, the true believers who “worshipped God in Spirit and truth” (John 4:23) remained faithful men of God. Both kept “a version” of the law of God. One group did so in a “stringently physical way,” while the true believers better understood the spiritual implications and practices of obedience. We see, however, that even many of these

“converted” Jews were slow to change in some things and continued in certain aspects of the traditional customs and practices that identified them as Jews. Of particular importance in their culture was the practice of circumcision. Many of these practices had standing not just as doctrine but also as rites of their national heritage. Many of

these faithful Jews did indeed keep the law of God but also fervently longed for the arrival of Messiah and recognized Jesus as that Messiah. Paul refers to these true believers as being those who espoused the true “same gospel” as he himself was teaching. He differentiated the faithful Jews as the “circumcision” from his mission to the Gentile nations, which he describes as the “uncircumcision.”

These two descriptive “identifiers” highlight the key issues addressed in his epistle to the Galatians. It is important to note that Paul clearly says they both had the same gospel.

Paul does indeed speak against other wicked men (of which he was formally one) who had established a highly authoritative rulership over the faithful believers (of “the circumcision”) and perverted the law of God, making it a burden upon the people. These particular men were other Jews of the “old guard” who never acknowledged nor accepted Christ. They took leadership authority, which was not sanctioned by God and maliciously imposed their own commandments and traditions never intended by the law of God. As overseers, they forced their doctrines upon the culture by misapplying the law of God

under the Levitical Priesthood to gain superiority over the people and, in so doing, were supplanting the message in it that foreshadowed the coming of Christ. By “intermingling” their own decrees with the tenets of the now past Levitical priesthood they made these practices a “yoke on the necks of the people.” These men were not who Paul called “the circumcision” who preached the SAME GOSPEL as he did, even though these of the “same gospel” did indeed also to one degree or another cling to the custom and practice of circumcision. Rather, these others he speaks of were malicious men (as he himself once had been) who preached a very different gospel! He understood this clearly as he had been Saul of Tarsus, a chief persecutor of the very ones he refers to now as “the circumcision” who preach the same gospel he preaches. However, now that Jesus Christ had personally taught him, he knew very well how far he and those malicious men of “the Jews’ religion” had departed from the precepts of godliness, trusting too much in their own militant practices of obedience, customs, and traditions. He now clearly understood they were not following the true spiritual intent of the law as taught by God in the first place. He recognizes that it was no longer the religion originally given by God but a cruel burden manufactured by men conscripting its authority from a perversion of the truth.

Paul never suggests that Peter and the “circumcision” were persecuting Christians or consenting to the death of Stephen as these of “the Jews’ religion” had. Stephen was a deacon and among those who were indeed following the teachings of Christ and living according to His example. He was keenly aware that many of the converted Jews (of the circumcision) were also being “derailed” by factions among them who failed to fully embrace Christ and the New Covenant. It was now Paul’s mission to help them see

their error in two ways. First, to see that the Messiah they had longed for had come and was indeed Christ. And second, to help them understand the true spiritual observance of the law as the proper way to live following Christ’s example. Christ said, “be ye holy as I am holy,” and Paul himself said, “follow me as I follow Christ.” Paul wanted them to see obedience as a demonstration of “righteous living” but not to rely on their own efforts to unilaterally achieve salvation, which, he teaches is not possible in the first place.

The epistle to the Galatians is complicated as it deals with the many multi-faceted and “interwoven” cultures of the day. This is not unlike what we see today in traditional Christianity with its many dozens of various sects, each with its own widely different customs and practices yet all claiming to be the true followers of Christ. Even with this difficulty, we find in these writings many plain and simple concepts when seen in light of “all Scripture.” Paul had dedicated himself to learning and studying the scriptures and achieved a mastery of the content of the written Word of God available in his day. He

fully knew the concepts of Scripture. This background formed a solid foundation for Paul in that he knew what he was talking about. Yet he states clearly that it was the “revelation of Christ” to him that drove him to see how these concepts were being misapplied as Christ Himself said in Matthew 15:19: “teaching for commandments the doctrines of men.” Paul (when he was Saul) was himself acting contrary to godliness when Christ struck him blind on the road to Damascus and taught him personally. He now emphatically takes a stand against:

- Hard-line Jewish zealots (the malicious and militant “law only” faction) who had rejected Christ, of which he was formerly a part.

- Syncretistic Gnostics who were trying to gain a following by blending the customs of various rites and practices from various groups with astrology and strange pagan customs (the “weak and beggarly elements”) into a dominant Jewish influence.

But also those who were converted Christian Jews even though they persisted in seeing circumcision as an essential sign of the true people of God.  The first two of these groups were trying to get men to focus on traditions and customs, most of which were a militant form of legalism or a perversion of the original intent of the practices of obedience

under the Levitical Priesthood.

 

But Paul also had to deal with the third group who were actually converted and part of the Church in Jerusalem yet were still affected by cultural and traditional challenges arising from their heritage as Jews. Paul addresses all three of these groups but sees them to varying degrees engaging in behavior or doctrine, which is contrary to the mission of the Gospel.

Paul is not upset with the Galatians for adhering to any part of the Ten Commandments, which remained as the “law of righteousness” but those things (such as circumcision), which were the ritual practices being forced upon them by outside influences—particularly the Jewish zealots. Paul understood clearly that the administration of the

Levitical Priesthood was now done away in the New Covenant and replaced by Jesus Christ our High Priest. Also, some of these ritual practices like circumcision (which identified the nation of Israel, as the “special people of God”) were no longer valid as a demonstration of righteousness. Paul was dogmatically showing that a person did

not need to be a physical Israelite to be saved, as Christ’s sacrifice was offered for everyone—not just physical Israel. This fact was difficult for the “old guard” who still maintained great influence over the communities involved and deferred to the Old Testament writings for their authority. How could he challenge this authority? He had to use the knowledge he gained from the direct and personal teaching he received from Jesus Christ to show the preeminence of the New Priesthood over the Levitical Priesthood and the New Covenant over the Old. The culture of the time was “transitioning” from the Old to the New Covenant. Paul was using the authority of the New Covenant and the grace offered by Christ’s sacrifice to thwart the efforts of the

“old guard” who continued to misapply their former authority by elevating laws and rituals no longer necessary to hold onto their former “special” status. Because the context of Paul’s arguments are buried in the issues of circumcision and ritual practices of syncretistic Judaism and the zeal of Jewish zealots in this book (epistle) it “appears” that he is militating against all law keeping. A thorough study of all of Paul’s writings shows that He supports and upholds the Ten Commandments as the “law of righteousness” given for all time.

Paul has no choice but to come down on “legalistic thinking” because the “strength of” this authority came directly from the scriptures being “artfully” misapplied! Paul “trumps” that authority showing its subordination to the New Covenant in Christ and that it remains but now serves as a foundation of the way to salvation and not the ultimate method by which we will gain salvation. Paul never states that the Ten Commandments are done away. These motivations were the driving force as seen in his words and in the context of what he says in his letter (epistle) to the Galatians.

Wikipedia: Gnosticism (Greek:…gnosis, knowledge) refers to a diverse, syncretistic religious movement consisting of various belief systems generally united in the teaching that humans are divine souls trapped in a material world created by an imperfect God, the demiurge, who is frequently identified with the Abrahamic God : called “Yahweh” or “Jahveh” for the true name of God is theineffable Tetragrammaton. The demiurge may be depicted as an embodiment of evil, or in other instances as merely imperfect and as benevolent as its inadequacy permits. This demiurge exists alongside another remote and unknowable supreme being that embodies good. In order to free oneself from the inferiormaterial world, one needs gnosis, or esoteric spiritual knowledge available to all through direct experience or knowledge (gnosis) of God. Jesus of Nazareth is identified by some Gnostic sects as an embodiment of the supreme being who became incarnate to bring gnosis to the earth. In others he was thought to be a gnosis teacher, and yet others, nothing more than a man. It is the Biblical serpent that promises Adam and Eve the knowledge of immortality: “Nequaquam moriemini; sed eritis; sicut dii; scientes bonum et malum.” The creation of woman as described in Genesis 2:21-22 has a special purpose: she is more susceptible to the demons and in their hands she becomes an instrument against man. By means of concupiscence instilled in her by the demons, Eve seduces

Adam not only to lust after the flesh but also to reproduce, the most formidable weapon in Satan’s plan to bring about the fall of man. However, in the hands of the Ophites who were Gnostic sects prevalent in Syria and Egypt about 100 AD, the biblical tale of Adam and Eve took on a new format by linking the Tree of Knowledge to Gnosis and the serpent became then worthy of worship.

 According to the Ophites “…As man was generated in the womb from a “serpent” and an “egg,” so was the universe… Gnosticism was popular in the Mediterranean and Middle Eastern regions in the second and third centuries, though some scholars claim it was suppressed and was actually popular as early as the first century, predating Jesus Christ as a dualistic heresy in areas controlled by the Roman Empire when Christianity became its state religion in the fourth century. Conversion to Islam and the Albigensian Crusade greatly reduced the remaining number of Gnostics throughout the middle ages, though

a few isolated communities continue to exist to the present. Gnostic ideas became influential in the philosophies of various esoteric mystical movements of the late 19th and 20th centuries in Europe and North America, including some that explicitly identify themselves as revivals or even continuations of earlier gnostic groups.

 Chapter One

1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus

Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead….

This is one of many examples where Paul clearly shows that God

the Father and Jesus Christ are separate beings—showing that the

Father raised Jesus Christ from the dead.

2 And all the brethren, which are with me, unto the churches

of Galatia:

3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father and from

our Lord Jesus Christ….

Once again he mentions God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ showing that they are separate beings.

4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from

this present evil world, according to the will of God and our

Father….

Notice that we are delivered from “this present evil world.” He doesn’t say that we are delivered from the law, as he fully understood God’s law is given to teach us how to live in accordance with the character of God Himself. We are ultimately “delivered from this present evil world” because Christ had deposed Satan as its ruler and will return to be King of Kings and Lord of Lords. If he had not accomplished this, we would continue to be under the hopeless bondage of this world.

The expression “God and our Father” is the same as saying God who is also our Father.

5 To whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.

6 I marvel that you are so soon removed from him that called

you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.

 Paul’s message to the Galatians by “construct” agrees with the message given by James in James 4:7–8: “Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. Draw nigh to God, and He will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.” John 6:44 says, “No man

can come to me except the Father which hath sent me draw him and I will raise him up at the last day.”

Paul is disturbed that they are “removed from,” separated, taken away, or no longer close to (notice it) Him—GOD THE FATHER—who called them! We draw near to Him by listening to Him—in other words, doing what He says to do, living the way He says to live, remaining humble before, and obedient to, Him. When we move away from Him we are doing the things that are contrary to righteousness—sinning—and turning away from His instruction and guidance.

Paul is astounded and disappointed that the Galatians had been removed from the Father and are following another gospel. Isaiah 59:1–2 tells how we are separated from God the Father: “Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.”

Paul is certainly not equating the gospel to the “circumcision” with the message of Syncretistic Judaism, which he describes as “the weak and beggarly elements.” This is clarified in Chapter 2, verses 7 and 8, where he states that the gospel given to him and to Peter are the same, and both came from the same source—Jesus Christ. Peter and Paul taught the SAME THING—the SAME GOSPEL! Therefore, it is inaccurate to conclude that the negative comments he makes toward Syncretistic Judaism and the weak and beggarly elements have anything to do with the true and pure gospel to the circumcision” or the faithful Jews ministered to by Peter. They had the very same message from Christ—the very same message Paul was preaching. The conflict that does arise between Peter and Paul in this book stems from the personal zeal they demonstrate in fulfilling two very different missions—one to the faithful Jews and the other to the Gentiles. These are two groups with very different cultures and fraught with prejudices. Some of what we witness here is a “clash” of these cultures and customs.

However, the “weak and beggarly elements” brought in by the Syncretistic Jews emanates from a very different source than the loyal and faithful Jews he calls “the circumcision,” which were the churches ministered to by Peter and the other apostles.

He mentions the “grace of Christ” as being a foundation of the correct understanding of the gospel, as indeed it is. Christ’s sacrifice provides the unmerited pardon (grace) the Galatians and we receive from God. As a result of Christ’s sacrifice, we are no longer under the death penalty for having sinned. Romans 6:23 states, “the wages of sin are death.” It is grace because no amount of obedience could have ever overturned the penalty for having broken the law just one time.

We were guilty and were under the death penalty. Christ’s sacrifice provides the way we are forgiven for those sins.

The Galatians were Gentiles, not Jews—they did not have the law previously. They had not practiced the law in observance of the first (old) covenant. This is made clear in Galatians 4:8: “…when you knew not God you did service unto them which by nature are not Gods.” Later in chapter 4, he states that they were returning to the “weak and beggarly elements.” Note: They could not be returning to a place (or a practice) where they had never been! What they were “returning to” in Galatians 4:9, and what Paul is alluding to here, were practices which were reminiscent of the elements of Syncretistic

Judaism, Zodiac Astrology, and the like. Paul was not calling any part of God’s law or even the old covenant “weak and beggarly elements.”

He was referring to a focus on ritualistic customs and practices that were creeping back into and mixing with the true gospel he had preached to them. He could not logically complain that they were returning to (again observing) things they never observed. But rather, they were perverting this new gospel he had preached to them by mixing into it things from their past ritualistic practices, traditions, and customs as well as the infection of customs from other cultures that crept in. Those are the “weak and beggarly elements” Paul is referring to. An element of Syncretistic Judaism was infecting their understanding of the gospel and was perverting it. They were also “infected by” the Jewish Zealots (Judaizers—Paul himself had been one of these before his conversion), which demanded that one cling to customs and that their personal unilateral effort was “the only way” one

could be saved. It supplanted Christ and His sacrifice as “the way” salvation is achieved. That is why he says they were “perverting” the gospel of Christ. They were following “a gospel” but it had been polluted with a “cocktail” of customs and practices, which Paul had never instructed or taught. This point is made clear in the very next verse.

7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

It is ludicrous to suggest that Paul is referring to the Old Covenant, the Ten Commandments, or any part of those things as perversions! He would never call those things that “pointed to Christ” as being perverted. In the truest and most comprehensive way, those things were part of the gospel message in that they were foundations of it. And it is of note that we are instructed in 2 Thessalonians 1:8, “…taking vengeance on them that know not God and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.” We know God if we obey Him and have a relationship with Him. First John 5:2 states, “By this we

know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.”

8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other

gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let

him be accursed.

It is important to reemphasize here that Paul himself says that the

gospel he preached WAS THE VERY SAME GOSPEL Peter was preaching

to the faithful Jews who Paul refers to as “the circumcision.” Paul was

not preaching that the Galatians (the Gentiles) should come out of or

depart from what the faithful Jews (“the circumcision”) were practicing.

9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any

other gospel unto you than that ye have received let him be

accursed.

 Paul dramatically says (and repeats it for emphasis) that anyone who changes what He had preached to them should be “cursed.” So what did Paul preach previously that he is referring to here?

In Romans we have an important example of what Paul was preaching. This passage is important because it discusses works, the law, the deeds of the law, and the law of faith: “Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all [we are “blanketed” by His grace] and upon all them that believe” (Romans 3:22).

Notice that it is the faith  of Jesus, not  in Jesus, by which we are brought into a condition of salvation. It is His faith, not ours, thatopens the door to salvation for us. Those who say it is our faith seem to suggest that it is by something we do! IT IS NOT!

Critics of those who do their best to obey God’s law often accuse them of somehow trying to “earn” salvation through works. Some claim that obedience itself is trying to “earn salvation” or an attempt to “pay for Christ’s sacrifice” for us. Yet, we know that there is nothing we could ever do that could rise to the value of Christ’s sacrifice for us. Simply put, it is impossible to pay for this gift. The price is too high—we have nothing of equal value to it. It cannot be purchased for any price! It is clear that Paul is emphasizing that trusting in anything that comes from within us falls woefully short and is the wrong

approach. But understanding and believing that Christ was fully faithful in what He did for us is the correct path and is what makes all the difference. Not just believing in Him but believing what He said and what He said we should do with our lives and how we should live should be the focus of true Christians. Not following Him and not living the way He directs we should live is rejecting Him. It is neither our faith nor our works that save us but Christ’s faithfulness in fulfilling His role as Messiah and in becoming a perfect sacrifice—paying our penalty for sin and qualifying to be King of Kings!

It wasn’t what we did or what we do that opened the door to salvation—IT WAS  SOLELY WHAT CHRIST DID! It was Christ’s faithfulness in obedience to God’s law (not ours) that allows us to be the recipients of His grace. Our keeping of the law did not ever make us righteous. Christ’s obedience did! We are made righteous when we accept

Jesus Christ’s sacrifice by faith that we are forgiven and therefore righteous. So indeed, our righteousness is “by faith”—but it is because of the faith of Jesus, not our own and not by “doing the deeds of the law.” The importance of faith is clear, but this does not say that “righteousness”—which is defined by the law—is somehow invalidated. Rather, it magnifies Christ’s faithfulness in keeping the law!

WE ARE SAVED BY HIS FAITH (faithfulness)—not by our own. Christ was perfectly faithful and kept the law perfectly. He now wants us to be faithful, too, and to follow His example. But the difference is we are not capable of doing it perfectly—that’s why He and the Father have given us their grace. “For there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). How could all have sinned if the law is no longer in force? All is ALL—it includes everyone who lived before Christ’s death and after it. ALL— every human being that has ever lived—have sinned! If the law is

somehow no longer valid after Christ’s death how could these people have sinned, as they too are part of the “all” mentioned here? Verse 21 says, “Even the righteousness of God is witnessed by the law and the prophets.” “Witnessed by” means attested to, described as, explained in, testified to, or demonstrated by. When we sin, we “come

short of” the glory of God”—so when we are not sinning we are moving in the direction of God’s glory. But since we cannot live a sinless life, Christ’s sacrifice removing our sinfulness completes the journey that we could not complete on our own through the deeds of the law.

So it is not our faith or our keeping of the law that saves us. That is why Paul is explaining here that we have no reason to boast. It is the faith of Christ in keeping the law and paying our penalty for our sins that saves us, so we can only “boast in Christ.”

Notice further: Romans 3:24–27 states, “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his [not our] righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness [not ours]: that he [not we] might be just, and the justifier of him which believes in Jesus [here is what we are required to do—believe in Jesus]. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law—of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.” Notice that faith and

law are bound-up together. We are to have faith that we are righteous

(considered to have kept the law) through the grace of God if we accept Christ’s sacrifice and believe that we are forgiven (from our past sins) and can be forgiven sins we now commit in our weakness.

If we sin “we have an advocate with the Father” (1 John 2:1), and He is our Mediator and intercedes in heaven for us as our High Priest. If striving to overcome sin is no longer necessary then we do not need an intercessor or a high priest.

“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law” (Romans 3:28). Well of course! Christ did it—we can’t—yet He justifies us anyway. That is the definition of grace— unmerited pardon. We have been justified even though we were unable to complete the deeds of the law, as we should. So we are “justified by faith [of Christ] without the deeds of the law.” This is not speaking about how we should live but rather how we are justified. It is not saying that the deeds of the law are not valid or important, only that they cannot justify us. Our effort to live according to every word

of God shows our willingness and acceptance of God as Lord of our life. He is Lord; we are not! We are not of our own! We are “the church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood” (Acts 20:28). We obey Him because we recognize that He has the right to ask it of us. What He asks of us is defined in the whole of Scripture.

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). We freely and willingly do what He asks, doing our best to be faithful to Him because He is our Lord!

“Is He the God of the Jews only [who strove to keep the law]? Is He not also of the Gentiles [who never strove to keep the law]? Yes, of the Gentiles also” (Romans 3:29).

Paul is stating emphatically that God is God of all—He is breaking down the “exclusive” attitude that the Jews had toward the Gentile nations. This was an important part of his message and his apostleship. He is showing that the New Covenant includes all. There

are two main “thrusts” in Paul’s message – one to the Jews, and one to the Gentiles. However, he is “sent to” the Gentile nations and therefore concentrates and focuses on the message to them. Because of this, he emphasizes an approach that is not “law focused”. He does not want them to take up where the Jews had “left off” he wants them

to go forward in a balanced approach to obedience and faith. Paul is clearly “jealous over” the Gentile churches in the same way that God is jealous over those who are His.

Notice the difference in the two “thrusts”:

- “Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision [the Jews] by faith…” (Romans 3:30a).Notice it is “by faith” here. The Jews had to accept that Christ had

done what they who had the law could not do—keep it perfectly—it was Christ’s faithfulness that allowed for “a way” to salvation—not their own.

- “…and uncircumcision [the Gentiles] through faith” (verse 30b).

Notice it is “through faith” here. The Gentiles had to believe (verse26) and have faith in Christ if they were to be saved. They had to have faith that Christ had also accepted them and would do for them what He said He would. Paul goes on to make a dramatic and

vital statement. Did any of these things “make void” the law? No! Rather, they established the law!

According to Webster, the word “established” means to make stable or firm; to set up; to found; to enact or decree by authority; to confirm; to prove; to verify; to substantiate. The Greek term means to uphold. Christians, then, far from invalidating the law, uphold the

law. But which law? The entire basis of the faith of Christ was that He was faithful in fulfilling all of the law perfectly. We can’t “fulfill” it as He did. Paul is rhetorically asking, Since Christ did it for us—and we are justified by His faith—does this somehow mean that the law is empty (void)? The answer: Emphatically, NO! The whole process

actually establishes the importance of the law in that the law defines the “righteousness of God” (see verse 22).

The key point is that there is nothing we do or can do that gives rise to boasting. Christ was the “faithful One” who “fulfilled” what we could not, who did what we could not do.

The expression, “establish the law,” refers to the law Christ kept in our stead. This is the law that is “established” here! This is the law that is the context of this discussion. The “law of faith” is introduced by Paul to emphasize the faith of Christ as the KEY ELEMENT in what He did for us. Paul separates the concept of the law (which requires

works) and the law of faith when he says, “Do we make void the law through faith?” For if he were saying, “Do we make void the law of faith through faith,” that would make no sense! He is showing that faith is a vital part of the process of fulfilling the requirements of the law.

He is clearly saying that the law  defines “the righteousness of God,” but only Christ has kept it perfectly. Therefore, we should never boast as a result of even our very best effort to obey His laws.

Though Scripture implores that we live according to every word of God, it also teaches that we all have fallen short of perfection (“all have sinned and come short of the glory of God”)—no matter how noble the attempt. That is why it is only by Christ’s faithfulness in doing what we could not that we can be saved! In all of this, the law is not voided; its very importance is established. If anyone preaches differently—he is accursed!

10: For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please

men? For if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of

Christ.

11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was

preached of me is not after man.

 Paul is clearly emphasizing that his message is not designed to win him any popular support among men. He was delivering a message to them directly given to him by Christ. He understood and proclaimed that if he deviated from Christ’s message to please men he would not be acting as Christ’s servant (minister).

At this point, one should ask a question: Which do you suppose would be the more “popular” message: that you no longer have to keep the law but just believe or have faith? Or, that in order to demonstrate your faith it is important to diligently keep the law but be humble about it, for your law keeping gains you nothing? It was Christ’s PERFECT obedience that opens the door to our salvation. So, obey God, but don’t boast about it.

Rather, have your confidence in what Christ did on your behalf. This is Paul’s message here.

12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it but

[he received it] by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Paul establishes the authority of his message by pointing out that it was not something he learned on his own; rather, it was taught to him directly by Christ. Paul knew that many of the Jews were rejecting Christ and clinging to their strict customs and traditions that

Christ said were not His doctrines (Matthew 15:9). He was now emphasizing that men needed to look to Christ for salvation—trusting in Christ, believing what He said as well as embracing the way of life He taught we should live—not following traditions, customs of men, and the like. Paul’s authority came directly from Christ.

13 For you have heard of my conversation (conduct) in time

past in the Jew’s religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted

the church of God, and wasted it.

14 And profited in the Jews religion above many my equal in

my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions

of my fathers.

 Paul refers to the time when he was “exceedingly zealous” in following the strict customs and traditions “of his fathers” and had strayed so far from righteous behavior that he himself was persecuting the true church of God, even consenting to the killing of its saints.

Most of these he persecuted were Jews led by Peter and the other apostles, but they were not part of what he refers to as “the Jew’s religion,” and he and those in it were persecuting the converted Jews— “the circumcision.” Christ rescued him from this false way on the road to Damascus. Paul clearly shows that his own behavior was not according to righteousness. He refers to this behavior as “the Jew’s religion,” not God’s religion. He is NOT, however, comparing what he called “the Jews religion” to the way Christ lived, which included obedience to God’s law. Christ lived a perfect life, perfectly keeping God’s law. Paul was NOT referring to this true way of life as being the Jew’s religion. Otherwise he would have been attacking the very excellent life of Christ. This “Jews religion” he refers to was the religion of the men who sat on the Sanhedrin, who ordered the death of Christ on “trumped-up charges” of blasphemy, accusing Him because He claimed to be the Son of God! He is referring to this religion of

the Sanhedrin that had been perverted by “teaching for commandments the DOCTRINES OF MEN.” These are Christ’s own words—and remember it was Christ Himself who taught Paul, as the apostle clearly states next.

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace,

16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the

heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them, which were apostles

before me: but I went to Arabia, and returned again unto

Damascus.

 Paul is saying that what he now teaches was taught directly to him by Christ and very different from those perverted teachings that drove his bad behavior in the past. And now, having been directly chosen by God to reveal Christ to the Gentiles, he did not need to and therefore did not consult with men (for three years) in this responsibility but, rather, just followed the directions Christ gave him.

18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter,

and abode with him fifteen days.

 Note that Paul and Peter stayed together for fifteen days. They were very compatible and of the same faith and beliefs. Paul next speaks of the other apostles, saying he had not spent any time with them except James, Christ’s living brother. He refers to them as

“apostles” (as they truly were the apostles of Christ), showing that he fully recognizes their position.

19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s

brother.

20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God,

I lie not.

 Paul is emphasizing that his message comes directly from Christ. He is not saying it is exclusive of what the apostles are doing, only that it is directly from Christ Himself.

21 Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Celica

22 And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judea which

were in Christ:

23 But they had heard only, that he which persecuted us in

times past now preaches the faith, which once he destroyed.

24 And they glorified God in me.

 When Paul came into this area, they did not recognize him but were aware of his former reputation of persecuting their brothers. Now they witnessed he was preaching the true message of faith, so they glorified God for this “conversion” of a former enemy.

Chapter Two

1 Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with

Barnabas, and took Titus with me also.

2: And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them

that gospel which I peach among the Gentiles but  privately to

them, which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run,

or had run, in vain.

3 But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was

compelled to be circumcised:

 Upon inspiration (revelation) Paul is compelled and goes back to the disciples and apostles in Jerusalem and “confers with them” regarding the progress of his message to the Gentiles. The context of this discussion shows that many in the culture of the Jews (“the circumcision”) had difficulty accepting the Gentiles (the Greeks particularly) (“the uncircumcision”) as being “grafted-in” and made part of the spiritual Body of Christ. Therefore, he is careful to speak to the leaders privately, understanding that a more public meeting might cause suspicion among their culture. This consideration on Paul’s part

allowed the leaders of the faithful church in Jerusalem to better handle these sensitive issues in the way they saw best. This was not Paul’s “turf,” so to speak. Paul was showing respect to their position and understood the kinds of problems the leaders in Jerusalem were dealing with. He was inspired to go “by revelation” for the purpose of

continuing to unify the church as one body during a difficult transitional period for the Jews. The issue of circumcision had become a major point of contention between these two groups. In all of church history we find arguments over doctrinal issues—in that day, circumcision was a point of argument. The more traditional Jews held to the practice incorrectly as an “essential” point of obedience. They were “clinging to” their national heritage of being the “special people of God.” Titus was taught by Paul and saw no need to be circumcised as the Jerusalem culture practiced. Paul understood clearly that it was

not a requirement of obedience and knew that he and the Gentiles were subject to criticism and judgment by the Jews on this point. It was a “highly charged emotional issue” of the day as the Jews’ culture transitioned from their status as the “special” people of God in a national sense to being “part of” the people of God in a spiritual sense, with other nationalities being “grafted-in.” This was difficult for them to understand and has remained a “bone of contention” to this day.

4 And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who

came in privily to spy out our liberty, which we have in Christ

Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage.

5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour;

that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.

6 But of these [the false brethren] who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it makes no matter to me: God

accepts no man’s persons) for they who seemed to be somewhat in

conference added nothing to me:

 Paul clearly shows that the men who were causing this “contention” and stirring up the culture over circumcision were  FALSE BRETHREN. These were people who came in secretly and were acting as spies to try to discover fault with Paul and those with whom he met to accuse them and to bring the weight of misapplied doctrine down upon them. Apparently, these false brethren were infiltrating the ranks of the true church and were gaining support and popularity to some degree. It is important to note that these scriptures show that those “of reputation” (the leadership) were not part of these false brethren, but

Paul mentions the false brethren to point out that they were causing a problem for the church in Jerusalem—the true “circumcision”—and he is keenly aware of them. These false brethren were playing on the emotions of the people as they transitioned from their once special status as the people of God to being part of the larger Body of Christ with all nationalities grafted in. Simply put, Paul and the leaders in Jerusalem were dealing with prejudice between the Jews and the Gentiles. You will notice in verse 5 that Paul says he would not “give place” to them or be in subjection to them (the false brethren), not

even for an hour. In our culture, we would say “not for a minute”!

You will also notice that Paul says the gospel they already had in Jerusalem—taught to them by the true “circumcision,” led by Peter and the apostles—was the same true gospel. Notice: “that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.” The text here goes on to emphasize these points.

Paul says in verse 6 that these men seem to have some status in the culture, as he says they are “somewhat in conference” (or in dialogue) with, and having some influence in, the culture in Jerusalem, but they contributed nothing (“added nothing to me”).

7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter: [NOTICE: It is the same message.]

8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship

of the circumcision,  the same was mighty in me toward the

Gentiles.)

9 And when James, Cephas [Peter], and John, who seemed to

be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave

to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship that we should

go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

 They were “contrary” when they saw that Paul was indeed commissioned with the gospel to the Gentiles. Instead of honoring and accepting the idea, they were “contrary” to it; they opposed it. They continued to reject the idea that the Gentile nations were being grafted in. But, when James, Peter, and John—the pillars of the church at Jerusalem—understood that the gospel committed to Paul was the same as the gospel to them but that each was commissioned to different cultures (“the circumcision” and the  uncircumcision”—the Jews and the Gentile nations), they approved and extended their (plural) “right hands of fellowship.” In other words, they endorsed the idea of the same gospel going to the two different groups. It was the same inspiration by the same God. “For He that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, THE SAME was mighty in me [Paul] to the Gentiles.” There were not two gospels or gospel

“givers”; there were two commissions, one to the Jews and one to the Gentiles— but it is clear the message was the same.

10 Only they would that we should remember the poor, the

same, which I also was forward to do.

They agreed that the poor should be ministered to.

11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the

face, because he was to be blamed.

12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the

Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated

himself, fearing them, which were of the circumcision.

13 And other Jews dissembled with him insomuch that

Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

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 you

being a Jew live after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as do

the Jews, why do you compel the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

But when Peter came to Antioch, he and Paul had a serious disagreement, or dispute, about the issue of circumcision and how it was being handled. The Jews who were of “the circumcision” were being heavily influenced by those who still held to the former understanding that actual physical circumcision was required as part of obedience. This idea permeated the culture in Jerusalem. Peter and some of the disciples were “compromising” with this issue and now it had even affected Barnabas. They knew that it was no longer “required” but also that it was not “forbidden” or in any way contrary to living according to God’s Word, remaining perfectly acceptable as a custom and tradition of the Jews. Continuing the practice as a part of their culture did not conflict with anything required in the New Covenant.

Therefore, they did not dissuade the Jews from continuing the practice. However, many continued to elevate the practice as “essential” even though it no longer was.

The cultural clash between the Jews and Gentiles was exacerbated by the Jerusalem apostles’ “tolerance” of those who continued to view this practice as an essential part of doctrine even though they (Peter and the other apostles) knew differently. We see this in Paul’s rebuking Peter for compelling the Gentiles to do things Peter did not require of himself. He notes the Jerusalem leadership’s hypocrisy (“dissimulation”) in this. Paul was upset with them for their own behavior but also for not clarifying this issue for the Jews and further by allowing many of the Jerusalem culture to persist in thinking less

of the Gentiles for not adopting and requiring the practice. The attitude of the day was, “Well, if they want to be part of us (Jews), then they should be circumcised as we are!”

They were missing that God was not making the Gentiles part of the Jews (in a national sense) but was doing so in a spiritual sense and extending His grace to all mankind. That remained a difficult concept for the Jews to assimilate. Frankly, the Jews could not easily see that they were no longer the sole “special people of God.”

Circumcision was a major symbol of that “special status” by their custom. This was purely an issue of cultural prejudice, haughtiness, and a lack of understanding on the part of the Jews. However, the problem was made worse by the failure of the leadership (Peter) to make these clarifications. This was the source of the disagreement

and the reason Paul was upset with Peter and those who continued to “tolerate” this behavior.

Paul was “lovingly protective” of his congregations and was very concerned that this issue was going to cause division and apprehension among them needlessly. Peter also was “lovingly protective” of his congregations and was concerned that forcing the issue by deemphasizing the practice would cause division and apprehension among his flocks as well. Each had a different vantage point and different cultures to contend with.

Paul boldly challenged Peter (blaming him) and those who permitted the Jews to insist on circumcision as an “essential doctrine” of conversion for the Gentiles. Paul was on the “higher ground” and correct about clarifying what was and what was not required even though Peter was doing his best to maintain calm among the Jews on this issue. Paul saw it as hypocrisy for Peter to eat with the Gentiles when he was alone with them (showing that he, Peter, did not agree with the cultural prohibitions regarding fraternizing with the uncircumcised) but refrain from doing so when the Jews were present, not wanting to create a controversy among his own congregations. This upset Paul and he said so to Peter.

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 [except] 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.

 Paul states that he and those like him were indeed Jews by birth and heritage. Even though he now ministered to the Gentiles, his background and foundation was of the Jews. He understands that the Jews viewed the Gentile culture as being “outside the framework” of righteous living. His statement here is an implication that his present association with them should not be used somehow to assign a label to him based on their former heathenistic practices.

They know (and so do Peter and the other apostles) that no one is justified by anything he does. No man but Christ has remained perfectly faithful in obedience. Therefore, we are justified only by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. Notice that he constantly uses the phrase

“the faith of Christ.” Paul is emphasizing that regardless of what we do, whether as a ritual or our efforts to obey the very law of God, nothing we do on our own can justify us—only the blood of Christ can do that. The faith that we individually demonstrate is our belief in Christ and acceptance of what He did on our behalf. Our belief (faith)

in Christ is very different than the FAITH OF CHRIST. This statement simply explains how we are justified—the faith (faithfulness)  of Christ. It does not explain how we demonstrate our faith back to Him—which is or our faith in Christ.

Is Paul being contradictory?

Verse 16 presents an interesting challenge for us when compared to Paul’s own words to the Romans, where it appears he contradicts this statement. Here, in Galatians 2:16, he clearly says “that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ.” But in Romans 2:13, he says that “the doers of the law shall be justified.”

How is it possible to reconcile these two statements? It is important to notice the words “is not” in the Galatians statement and the words “shall be” in the Romans statement. This seeming contradiction is a key point in understanding exactly what Paul is teaching— that the law is still a part of the process, still the way we are to measure our lives and demonstrate our faith toward God.

In Galatians, he says a man  is not justified by works—that is, works of his own—but continues by immediately saying a man is justified by the faith of Christ. Notice that justification comes from the faith OF Christ, not IN Christ. This means that justification comes to us by way of the FAITHFULNESS OF CHRIST—His faithfulness expressed

in keeping God’s law perfectly. It is by  Him, not by us! Then, in Romans, he says the doers of the law “shall be justified.” These two statements are showing that if a person is focused only on doing the physical points of the law apart from Christ, he is not justified. But if a person commits himself to the tenets of righteous living and is a “doer of the law,” obeying God because He is God and places his faith IN Christ and the promise of redemption through Him, then he “shall be” justified. In all cases, as Paul says to the Galatians, the justification is by the FAITH OF CHRIST—so we, then, should demonstrate that we have faith in His promise, not in our own works.

The Galatians statement is showing that we should obey the things God requires of us and not what men require. We do this because we know that our obedience in this way actually demonstrates our faith IN Christ. Then and only then are we justified by the faith OF Christ.

We believe He is God, so we do what He says we should do and live the way He says we should live—“according to every word of God.”

The Romans statement is showing that Christ will only justify those who are the “doers of the law,” those who demonstrate their faith, not just the hearers. Actually, these two statements together are a strong argument for obedience to the law now that Christ’s faithfulness has created a condition where we can be justified. They are not mutually exclusive—they are actually quite complimentary.

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.

If we are looking to Christ for justification and we sin, Paul asks, is Christ then the minister of sin? Certainly not! It is interesting to note that some who seek to invalidate the law claim this section of Scripture is doing just that. But look closely at how Paul uses these phrases. He is speaking here of a person who is seeking justification, and whose quest is expressed through a striving to live according to righteousness—that is, keeping the commandments of God’s law.

Paul is merely emphasizing that God’s grace does indeed exist for a person like this. He shows that Christ is indeed working with this person, ministering grace to him. God does NOT SEE this person as a sinner. Christ does not become a “minister of sin”—He does not accommodate sinfulness—once grace is imputed to this person and he is seen as justified. But, remember, this person is indeed SEEKING to be justified—striving to obey. This is a person who has been justified by the faith of Christ, not by the person’s own efforts. The grace of God covers us (notice it) IF WE ARE SEEKING HIM—trying to live according to righteousness.

Before His perfect sinless life and His ultimate sacrifice we could not be reconciled or justified, and our sins remained—we stood guilty before God. But now, if we are seeking first the Kingdom of God— doing our best to obey Him, seeking to be justified by Him—we then are justified by God’s grace, which came as a direct result of Christ’s

faithfulness to His purpose for coming into the world.

18 For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.

Paul is speaking to a culture, which was having difficulty accepting Christ. He is emphasizing that things are different now that Messiah has come. Successful righteous living requires a different approach and a different reliance. He wants them to come out of the guilt of their imperfection and recognize that God was offering a new way to justification through Christ.

Paul states, “Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before” (Philippians 3:13).

He is simply saying here that we must no longer rely on our own imperfect ability to obey, for this produces heaviness and guilt.

Rather, we need to put that in the past and have a “forward look” to our lives. Paul consistently teaches that we need to “let go” of our past guilt and accept the grace offered by God through the faith of Christ.

He urges us to build (anew) on the perfectly “solid rock” of Christ rather than continuing to rely on the “shifting sand” of our own imperfect efforts alone. We are to replace (cast out) self-reliance with reliance on a new foundation, which is Christ.

Paul uses the word “build” to suggest that “building” our lives upon this new foundation is better than returning to the former, weaker foundation of the past. This is because the new process brings justification and freedom from guilt if we seek Him and allow Him to be our Advocate with the Father. The issue here is about how to view the process of becoming righteous—not working alone but, rather, through Christ!

In the past our personal effort in obedience was “all there was,” but it could never measure up. However, now our personal effort to obey God no longer stands alone all by itself but rather is buttressed by (or justified by) the work of Christ. God’s plan is “unfolding” just as he designed it. God’s law remains the foundation for righteousness.

But righteousness is no longer solely a matter of effort but a matter of justification in that we are justified through His sacrifice as Christ advocates and mediates in His position as our High Priest before the Father on our behalf.

19 For I through the law am dead to the law that I might live

unto God.

Paul says that through the law he is dead to the law. Many who seek to invalidate the law actually turn this statement around and preach that because of grace we are dead to the law and no longer need to observe (or obey) the law. But that is NOT what Paul says! He says it is the law itself that causes him to be dead to the law. Notice that he says it is actually “through” the law that he has become dead to it! Interesting isn’t it? What does this mean? How can obeying the law make you dead to the law? Simply put, if we seek to obey the law and fail, we are worthy of the penalty for sin. Paul writes, “For the wages of sin are death” (Romans 6:23). So if we strive to keep the law alone (apart from grace),

and fail, the penalty of death looms over us. But notice further that Paul uses the connective word “that.” He says, “…that I might live unto God.” Paul is showing that this process of obeying the law as best one can but failing to do it perfectly because of normal human weakness (thus deeming one “dead”) is somehow the very process by which he is

able to live unto God! Did you get that? By striving to obey and having fallen short he is considered dead. But now, being dead by that process alone, he is able to live to God by some other process (“that I might live unto God”)—the grace of God. He is showing that the law leads us to grace. Otherwise, if we are not guilty of having broken the law, grace is not needed. It’s an awkward statement for sure but does show that we are now able to live to God (“that I might live unto God”) as a direct result of our attempt to obey the law as modified in the New Covenant, even though we all fall short. He goes on to elaborate that this possibility comes through Christ our High Priest who has replaced the Levitical Priesthood and the administration of the things, which were part of that priesthood.

20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ lives 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.

These verses are a continuing iteration of what he says in verse 19. Again he says he is dead. But in this particular statement he says he is dead (crucified) “with” Christ, and yet he remains alive. Paul says it is Christ who now lives in (within) him. By this statement he is declaring that the person who he was in the past is now gone, replaced by the

presence or spiritual influence of Christ. In saying it is “by the faith of the Son of God,” he credits the faith (faithfulness) of the Son of God, not his own efforts. He goes on to show appreciation for the love God has bestowed upon him, even expressing that he sees a very personal aspect in Christ’s sacrifice stating that he “gave himself for me.”

21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness

comes by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

 Paul teaches here that when we emphasize the law  apart from what Christ did for us we act to “frustrate” grace. He says he himself does not do that! Because righteousness does not come from our ability to keep the law (as our human weakness prevents us from keeping it perfectly); rather, righteousness comes through grace, which is made available as a result of Christ’s death and sacrifice in our place. He continues to clarify that righteousness apart from the sacrifice of Christ is simply not possible. He is explaining and emphasizes that if salvation (righteousness) came by our own efforts, then Christ did not need to die as He did.

 Chapter Three

1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should

not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?

 Notice he speaks of  obedience to the truth—obey means to do what you are told. What they were doing was not “true,” not based on “truth.” Apparently, they were NOT obeying what God’s Word defined as proper obedience. They had stopped obeying something that Paul had taught them that they should! Notice it—they were no longer

obeying! They had “turned away” from doing what they were supposed to do and were apparently doing “other [wrong] things” instead. Paul uses the term “bewitched,” indicating that they were deceived into doing things which were not of God, things not taught by Paul, whether in word or by example—things which “derailed them” from doing the things they should do! (“Be ye followers [imitators] of me, even as I also am of Christ.”)

The understanding of the life, death, burial, and resurrection of Christ was a “current event.” It was the greatest event of the time, and everyone was essentially just beginning to comprehend what it all meant and what the ramifications of these things were. This information was being “taught” to them by Paul and those assisting him. In other words, they were “hearing and understanding what Christ did for each of them personally” for the very first time. It was this hearing that was communicating that  grace, which did not come from physical effort alone but was now available as a result of what Christ

had done. Prior to Paul’s ministry to them, all they knew was performance of physical rituals, customs, and practices. Now these outside influences were trying to use this “habit” to “convert” these people to “their way,” using a “law-focused” tactic intertwined with a misapplied authority of the Old Testament Scriptures failing to recognize the implications of the New Covenant Christ had established.

 2 This only would I learn of you, Received you the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

 The Galatians did not have the law prior to Paul’s ministry. Paul’s ministry to them began with preaching about the work of Christ.

However, we know from the whole body of Paul’s writings that he preached they should follow Christ’s example with full recognition of the gift his sacrifice had bestowed upon them. They had no prior foundation in the true works of obedience. They received the Spirit by ACTING UPON what they heard from Paul! In speaking to the Romans,

Paul said, “So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God” (Romans 10:17).

Until Christ came, was sacrificed, resurrected, and returned to heaven, God’s Holy Spirit had not been given as it was on the Day of Pentecost. Until these events took place, neither grace nor the Spirit was available to them. But you will notice that “hearing” was an essential part of having this Spirit. It was not universally available without this hearing Paul speaks of, and it was not available prior to these events despite any effort on their part to obtain it through some physical means. Syncretistic Judaizers, Jewish Zealots, and those who refused to acknowledge that the priesthood had changed from the Levites to Jesus Christ were trying to influence the Galatians into demonstrating their faith through circumcision and other practices.

These factions saw the practice as REQUIRED and ESSENTIAL to proper obedience. Their argument (as it pertained to circumcision) was convincing as the Old Covenant had indeed established the practice. The Old Testament writings remained the “Bible of the day” and continued to carry great weight as the “authority” on the matter. This made it difficult and confusing for the Galatians. To overcome this obstacle, Paul goes beyond just the practice of circumcision to declare emphatically that any physical effort of any kind (especially the rite of circumcision) apart from Christ is vain (or worthless) in bringing us to salvation. The “infiltrating factions” were obsessed with physical

practices of various sorts, but circumcision was indeed  THE prime point of contention. Paul was using the “higher moral authority” of the giving of God’s Holy Spirit and the grace which came as a result of Christ’s sacrifice to “trump” their misuse of the Old Testament as their authority in the same sense that the New Covenant “trumps” the

Old Covenant by magnifying the importance of the spiritual over the physical without destroying its foundation. He was not setting it aside but building upon it and demonstrating that the New Covenant was indeed different in some very specific ways, and he was also showing that God’s plan had progressed  past physical obedience alone and now entered into a higher spiritual plane. His effort here is to thwart the  misapplication of the authority of the Old Covenant in this way.

You will notice that Paul never says that circumcision is wrong or a sin—just that it does not get us to salvation. Paul fully understood that the ritual practices of the Levitical Priesthood had been replaced with the spiritual implications of the new Priesthood of Jesus Christ.

Actually, his point is that reliance upon such things alone (as these factions were teaching) actually frustrates the ultimate goal of salvation now that the priesthood had changed.

3 Are ye so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are ye now

made perfect by the flesh?

4 Have ye suffered so many things in vain? If it be yet in vain.

5 He therefore that ministers to you the Spirit, and works miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the

hearing of faith?

 Paul chastises them for being foolish to look for “another way” to be “made perfect” which is contrary to understanding that it was the faith of Christ only which justifies us.

His clear use of the word “flesh” refers to the main issue here, which is circumcision—the obvious context and the key issue in the entire discourse of the book. He reminds them that their very conversion could be at stake if they were now embarking on a path different from the one upon which they began, being led by God’s Holy Spirit,

as clearly evidenced in Paul’s message and backed up by actual miracles they had all witnessed.

6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him

for righteousness.

7 Know ye therefore that they, which are of faith, the same,

are the children of Abraham.

 Abraham is an interesting choice in this discourse. First, because the Jews considered themselves “children of Abraham” and said he was their “father.” Paul cleverly uses Abraham, a patriarch with exceptional credentials in two important ways significant in this discourse. First, Abraham demonstrated impeccable obedience up to and including the willingness to sacrifice Isaac in total obedience to God.

And, second, Abraham was a man of faith, having complete confidence that God would grant and fulfill His promises to him. His choice of Abraham further supports Paul’s teaching that obedience and faith were important and not contrary to one another, as Abraham was a man who clearly demonstrated both. He states clearly that those who are Christ’s by faith are indeed also the children of Abraham, a thing the Jews liked to claim for themselves alone.

8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify  the

heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham,

saying, in thee shall all nations be blessed.

9 So then they, which are of faith, are blessed with faithful

Abraham.

Paul shows that scripture supports that it was always God’s intention to include the Gentile nations in His plan. He is showing them that they (spiritual Jews) need not consider themselves somehow less than physical Jews. But notice that he reiterates that Abraham was FAITHFUL. How was he faithful? Abraham was a man who did what

God said to do regardless of the outcome. Then, he also trusted God that everything would come out OK, as he knew God, lived according to every word of God,and fully expected God to fulfill His promises to him. Abraham is the perfect example to show how obedience interacts with faith—how law and grace are in perfect balance

AND NOT mutually exclusive!

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the

curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continues not in

all things, which are written in the book of the law to do them.

 It is worthy of note that Paul uses the expression “of the works of the law.” He is emphasizing that some are of this way of life, relying entirely upon what they do and upon their own ability to obey rather than upon the mercy of God. Paul speaks of those who are “of works” and contrasts them with those who are “of faith.” It is not a comment

on what they are doing; rather, it’s a commentary upon what they rely for their salvation. The “curse of the law” was obviously that it carried the death penalty. However, it should be noted that under the Levitical Priesthood there were “atonements” made for the people

and there were sin offerings and sacrifices. There was indeed a process in place to deal with sin, and that process (with its many sacrifices) pointed to the ultimate sacrifice, which was to be made for all mankind by JESUS CHRIST! This section of the text actually clarifies the point that regardless of how we strive to keep the law we will fall

short. And, having fallen short, without Christ’s sacrifice we would be doomed. But  because of Christ’s sacrifice, we are forgiven upon repentance and receive grace. That is Paul’s entire point. The Jews had difficulty accepting Christ, and it is Christ that makes salvation possible, not works of obedience. If one trusts only in his own ability to obey the law apart from accepting Christ’s sacrifice, he is foolish. Paul is pointing out the obvious: that mankind simply is incapable of perfect obedience, so seeking salvation in this way is “suffering in vain” in the attempt.

11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it

is evident: for, the just shall live by faith.

 This is simply the statement of the overarching principle of the book. Notice that it does not say we must stop obeying the law—not at all! It simply clarifies that we are not justified by the law. You will never find in Paul’s writings that he ever says don’t obey God’s Word.

12 And the law is not of faith: but, the man that doeth them

shall live in them.

 Obedience is “faithfulness” (remaining loyal), but it is not faith (having unswerving belief and trust). Just as Abraham’s obedience wasn’t a demonstration of his faith but rather of his “faithfulness.” It was his unswerving belief that God would do what He said He would do—that was a demonstration of his faith. It was his faith that actually allowed him to be faithful in his obedience. If Abraham did not believe that God would honor His promise, it is unlikely that Abraham would have been very willing to offer Isaac because he knew that his actions alone by obeying would not save his son. Abraham knew God was God and had every right to demand things of him, so he obeyed. BUT he further trusted and believed that God always operated in his (Abraham’s) best interest and that God would indeed honor His promise. It was Abraham’s belief and trust that was

a demonstration of his faith. If a person is “of faith,” he trusts in something other than what he can do for himself. If a person is “of the law alone” there is only self-reliance, and he will need to be perfect to inherit the promise.

13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being

made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that

hangs on a tree:

 What has Christ redeemed us from? DEATH! “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 6:23). We are redeemed from death, which is the “curse of the law.” But notice we are not redeemed from dying—we all will die. “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this

the judgment” (Hebrews 9:27). You will further notice that after we die, there still remains a “judgment”! Christ died in our place, paying our sin debt, that we might have eternal life. The “hanging of Christ on that tree” was the curse—it was the penalty for our sins—a death that could not be reversed for those who sinned. But Christ did not sin

and so He (and only He) could be resurrected as our Savior and now sits at the right hand of God the Father as our High Priest!

14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles

through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the

Spirit through faith.

 He reiterates that the blessing (of eternal life and entrance into the Kingdom of God) made as a promise to Abraham comes also upon the Gentiles through Christ, provided they maintain hope and confidence (faith) in Him, allowing God’s Holy Spirit to live in them and bolster their faith. “And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also

the Holy Spirit, whom God hath given to them that obey him” (Acts 5:32).

15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; though it is but a man’s covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannuls, or adds thereto.

We know that when a covenant is made—if it is agreed to (confirmed)—then it stands. Once it is set in motion, it is final and cannot be added to.

16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He

saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed,

which is Christ.

The promise (of unlimited eternal generations) was made to Abraham and his descendants. God did not make the promise to other’s offspring (seed), but to Abraham’s. But Christ is of Abraham’s seed, and it is through Christ we are all saved—so the blessing is extended outward from Christ to all by the faith OF Christ to those

who have faith IN Christ. The physical Jews who were of Abraham received the promise, but the spiritual Jews who are of Christ also received the magnification of the promise.

17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before

of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty

years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of

none effect.

18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise:

but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

 The actual law spoken of here (Ten Commandments) given at Sinai was given 430 years after the promise given to Abraham and does not invalidate the original promise to Abraham. That promise stands!

19 Wherefore then serves the law? It was added because of

transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was

made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.

 The law was added because mankind needed guidelines to live in a godly way, to walk in the paths of righteousness, to understand what sin was and what was expected of them in this covenant relationship.

It was given until such time as God would manifest or reveal His Elect—“the Seed” he speaks of here. But the “until” mentioned in this verse does not show that it ends or is done away, but that a change takes place. This transition is spoken of clearly in Hebrews 8:10: “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.” Clearly, the law is not done away but made a part of the very way people think and live in the Kingdom of God.

21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

Paul emphatically states that the law of God is not in conflict with God’s promise. The giving of eternal life (“have given life”) does not come by the law, and mankind is unable to be counted as righteous because we are unable to live perfectly by the law. HOWEVER, he is clear that the law is not in conflict with the promise, which is given

to those who have His Holy Spirit. But He does not give His Spirit to those who reject Him by their actions, showing disregard for the very way of life Christ lived to become our sacrifice. “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh,

and put Him to an open shame” (Hebrews 6:4–6).

Paul said that he himself was living to “imitate” Christ and that we should follow him as he did so. We are to strive to become “like Him,” reaching toward the goal of perfection, seeking to be “without spot or wrinkle or any such thing.”

Peter writes, “Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwells righteousness. Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless” (2 Peter 3:13–14).

22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the

promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that

believe.

 Notice the following scriptures:

Romans 3:23: “For all have sinned [broken the law of God, for sin is the transgression of the law] and come short of the glory of God.”

Romans 6:23: “But the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Ephesians 2:8: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.”

Mark 16:16: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”

23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith, which should afterwards be revealed.

Paul starts this section by saying “before FAITH CAME we were kept under the law.” Let’s analyze what faith he is talking about. Is he suggesting that hope or trust in God were not possible before the institution of the New Covenant? No, not at all! He is clearly pointing to a time when something or someone came. In this case it is a “someone”—Christ. He says, “Before faith came,” because prior to Christ our trust (or faith) in our own efforts to obey the law perfectly was pointless. What happened when He came? Well, He paid the penalty for sin in our place. Prior to that “coming,” grace was not available to us. So the faithfulness of Christ was completed in his successful living according to the law—doing what we could not do “under the law”—fulfilling what we could not fulfill. Mankind—apart from Jesus—has not demonstrated that we are capable of this kind of faithfulness because of our own weakness and inability to live perfectly as

Christ lived. We were “shut up” to that kind of faith. When we were apart from the work of Christ, we had no valid place for our faith to reside. But now we can and do “trust” and “have complete confidence” in Christ and what He did for us. Why does he say it was revealed “afterward”? The completion of the faith of Christ was completed when He finished His mission on earth and died and ascended to heaven and took His place as our Mediator and High Priest. This was all “revealed” in that process which included the giving of God’s Holy Spirit on Pentecost.

24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto

Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

 The law indeed shows us (teaches us as a schoolmaster) what is and what is not sin. Observing the law does not justify us, but it teaches us what is and what is not righteousness. It teaches what is needed to BE justified. We learn (as we do our best to obey) that perfection is elusive and we all fall short of it. Knowing this, we are “under” the law’s penalties if left to our own devices and apart from Christ’s work of living a perfect life and becoming the pure sacrifice for all mankind.

25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

 But now that “faith is come”—and we can have full and complete trust and confidence that the work of Christ is established on our behalf—we are no longer left to our own imperfect efforts. We are not alone—no longer relying upon what level of perfection we can achieve apart from Him. We are now  under His grace. The word “under” simply shows what process justifies us. It does not invalidate the criteria upon which righteousness is defined. So the rendering of this verse in plain language would be:

“Now that Christ has faithfully lived a perfect life and paid our debt on the cross, we are no longer under the penalty of the law because we fall short of it, but rather we are under the grace offered by God through Christ as we strive to live as Christians according toevery word of God.”

 26 For you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

 Simply put, our reliance has shifted from our efforts to complete trust and confidence in Christ and what He did for us. Notice we are His children—part of the very family of God! We should live our lives as members of that family and subject to the very words of our Father and our King.

 

27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have

put on Christ.

 Notice that he clearly states that those who “have been baptized” into Christ have put on Christ! Part of the baptism process is to repent of one’s sins! There is actually a commandment to BE BAPTIZED! It is a requirement—a prerequisite to receiving His grace and His approval—and it is to  precede baptism. More than just thought or

belief is needed here—action is called for! This is a very clear example that doing something is actually necessary. The newly baptized believer “puts on” Christ. He or she lives according to every word of God, putting off the old man and putting on the new!

Notice in Paul’s words to the Ephesians that he mentions directly two of the Ten

Commandments and alludes to several others in these few verses. (You will find all of the Ten Commandments mentioned in the New Testament—mostly in the writings of Paul—clearly showing that he is certainly not militating against living according to them.)

Ephesians 4:22–32: “That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. Wherefore  putting away lying (Ninth Commandment), speak every man truth with his neighbor: for we are members one of another. Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: Neither give place to the devil. Let him that stole (Eighth Commandment) steal no more: but rather let him labor, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needed. Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that, which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God,

whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamor, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you.”

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor

free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

 Paul here is emphasizing the “all inclusiveness” of the grace of God. God sees all as potential children, and Christ’s sacrifice was intended for everyone who has lived. No one is left out, and there is no longer a “special people” just because of heritage. An entrance to all is available to the Kingdom of God by the grace of God through

Christ. He is “the way, the truth, and the life.”

Second Peter 1:10–11: “Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.”

John 14:6: “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

29 And if ye are Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs

according to the promise.

 First Corinthians 6:20: “For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.” (We BELONG to Christ—He bought and paid for us—we are Christ’s!)

First Corinthians 15:20–23: “But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first fruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the first fruits; afterward they that are Christ’sat his coming.”

 Chapter Four

1 Now I say, that the heir, as long as he is a child, differs nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;

2 But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed

of the father.

3 Even so, we when we were children, were in bondage under

the elements of the world.

 Paul uses the analogy of how a child is in subordination to his teachers just as a servant is subject to his masters even though the child may be born of great means. Still, when he remains a child, he must be subject to those who teach him until such time as he has

gained the discipline of maturity and is able to take his place among the adults—living the way he was taught. Mature and proper adults do not turn their back on what they have learned—they “build upon it.”

When we are children, we learn to behave because those in authority will take disciplinary action against us if we do not comport ourselves properly—according to their guidance. We are therefore “bound” by the force of their authority to do what they tell us to do. Good parents or teachers guide their children or students in doing the correct and

proper things, which lead to a successful life.

Paul uses the expression “bondage under the elements of the world.” What are these “elements” which place us in this “bondage.”

Earlier in the book Paul refers to this world as evil! Notice Galatians 1:4: “Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father.”

The clear intent of Paul’s comment addresses something in this world that is causing this bondage! Notice that the bondage comes from these “elements of the world,” not from the law of God. Later, in Galatians 6:12, Paul writes, “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against the powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” He is showing that the influence of Satan and his demons upon us places us in a “wrestling match” in this world, which oppresses us. He is clearly not saying, in any way, that the law is bad or that it is the “cause” of our problems. To clarify this, we can see what he writes to the Romans.

Romans 3:20 states, “[B]y the law is the knowledge of sin,” showing that though  obedience does not “justify us,” he clearly shows the law remains as the place where sin is defined. It tells us what is and is not sin, what we should and should not do. He is consistently clear that the law teaches us how to live according to righteousness. He

also writes, “Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid! How shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein?”

(Romans 6:1–2). Could it be any plainer? Paul says we should NOT live in sin (contrary to God’s law) any longer! He is clearly emphasizing that living in harmony with and according to God’s law is how we are to live! He then goes on to say, “Let not sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in the lusts thereof” (Romans 6:12).

There is no doubt that Paul is showing that this “bondage” is the result of evil forces acting upon us to tempt us to live “contrary to” God’s law. A person who persists in living this way is rebellingagainst God and turning his back on the grace provided by the sacrifice of Christ. When he does this, he is left only with the law alone and falls squarely under its penalties. But if a person comes to God and confesses and repents, Christ intercedes as the Mediator of the New Covenant and, as our High Priest, advocates for this person before the Father administering grace.

4 But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth

his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might

receive the adoption of sons.

6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his

Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

7 Wherefore you art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son,

then an heir of God through Christ.

 When the time was right, God sent His Son who was flesh (“made of a woman”) and who lived according to the law (perfectly)—“made under the law.” “Under the law” is a statement that clearly means that the force and penalty of the law was fully in place when He came as Jesus, and His presence did not change that. He was now fully in the flesh. He came into that state as all human beings do having a natural birth. He was physical, fleshly, human. He was (by His choice) now subject to His own laws in every way—including the penalty for failing to keep them. But, the purpose in what He was doing by this is expressed in verse 5: “to redeem them.” He was on a mission—we call it “His passion”—to live a perfect life and then be sacrificed on behalf of all mankind. He was positioning Himself to be the perfect, all encompassing, Lamb without spot or blemish—as foreshadowed by the sacrificial laws administered by the priesthood of the Old Covenant.

He came purposefully to be sacrificed to pay the penalty for all sin of all time and to replace the Old Covenant priesthood, taking its place as the High Priest of the New Covenant. He replaced the priesthood and its practices, NOT the law that defines what it means to be righteous and to have godly character!

Christ’s value as God was supreme—much higher and more awesome than anything that could ever be offered to pay this price. But to accomplish this, He had to live under the very laws He created. He had to remain subject to and under the penalty of the law or to live according to the law. Having lived perfectly, never sinning, He was not worthy of death—yet He subjected Himself to death willingly, taking our place and paying the penalty for all mankind. Because of who He is, the value of the sacrifice was more than sufficient to cover our debt. No one else could do it, but He was more than sufficient in this role. He fulfilled the obligation that we could not.

When the sacrifice was given by Christ, we are then able to be reconciled to the Father and accepted into His family. That is why Paul uses the phrase “adoption of sons.” Paul adds “and because you are sons” to emphasize that he is not speaking in some kind of analogy but is making a clear declarative statement that we are actually viewed by God as His children—His sons. He further emphasizes this by saying that God actually sends His Spirit into us, which recognizes this new relationship, and we cry “Abba Father,” which is the same meaning as crying “Daddy!” This is intended by Paul to show the intimacy that Christ’s work had facilitated—bringing us into this very close and intimate relationship with God the Father. He paid the penalty, taking it away—nailing it (the penalty, not the law) to the cross—so we now are reconciled to the Father and “adopted” into the family as His children. Christ is now our High Priest and “advocates” for us before the Father on our behalf.

Now, knowing that Christ has paid the penalty and now operates as our High Priest, notice that there remains a need to “confess” and strive to overcome sin, which John defines as “the transgression of [notice] the law” (1 John 3:4). John writes, “If we say that we have no sin [acting as though we are no longer capable of “sin” or that it doesn’t matter anymore or that somehow when we live unrighteously it is no longer seen by God as sin] we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. [Notice

that a confession of sin is necessary.] If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar and his word is not in us” (1 John 1:8–10).

John further states, “My little children, these things I write unto you that you sin not. And if any man sin we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And He is the propitiation of our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.

And hereby we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments” (1 John 2:1–3).

Paul continues to even more dramatically emphasize that this Father–son relationship exists between God the Father and us by saying that we are no longer “servants but a son” (His children) and “an heir of God through [the work of] Christ.” Because of what He did— not because of what we have done or will do. It is entirely through Christ! The entire discourse of this section of Galatians is dramatically emphasizing that because of what Christ did—not what we do—we are seen as “sons of God,” heirs to the Kingdom of God. Certainly not in God’s family at the same level as the Father or Christ but, nevertheless, sons and heirs. Paul is very clear on this point and strongly emphasizes it throughout this book.

8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto

them, which by nature are no gods.

9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known

of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements,

whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

Paul is drawing a familiar comparison to their past vain practices in heathenism with the current pressure they were receiving from the Jewish zealots who continued to cling to circumcision and were trying to impose it upon them. In this analogy, Paul is saying that those who would impose circumcision upon them are acting much the same

as the intent of their past heathenistic practices which contained an element of bondage to physical rituals. Paul is reminding them of the false gods they once served and that those practices were purely physical rites, which were vain, purposeless, and of no effect. In the next verse he labels  those things as “the weak and beggarly elements.”

However, it is important to understand exactly what he is calling “the weak and beggarly elements.” Paul is clear in saying these are the things they did prior to the time when he taught them about the true God. Those who would force them to be circumcised were reminiscent of the intent of those heathenistic practices of the Galatians in the days of old and, as such, this was something the Galatians could relate to. Paul is not referring to the Old Covenant or the law of God as “weak and beggarly”; he is simply drawing an analogy to the purpose of circumcision now being falsely applied to “establish their status” as being grafted into the community of the people of God by the Jewish zealots when in fact it is no longer part of the law of God as administered by the Priesthood of Christ. Circumcision had become a national physical rite, and it was nothing more. Many Jewish zealots had difficulty accepting this and continued placing a heavy emphasis (burden) on the requirement of this practice.

Paul was not only comparing this false application of circumcision but also other heresies (like astrology) that were creeping back into their belief system to the same type of bondage the Galatians knew before he taught them. He is expressing his disappointment that they were now returning to those things (a “mindset”) he had hoped

they had already overcome. That is why he was “upset” with them.

We see some clues of these other (than circumcision) issues in the next verse.

 10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.

Notice that Paul is talking about observances. In the list he mentions years. One could make the argument that people under the Old Covenant “observed” days and times (or seasons), but you will not find that they “observed” years other than land Sabbaths for agrarian purposes or the Jubilee year for relief of debt. It is highly unlikely that

Paul would be militating against land Sabbaths or debt relief—both good things. Neither of these would in any way detract from the message of Christ and had no penalty in unrighteousness—only self-contained ramifications. So his inclusion of “years” is interesting. It is more likely that this is a reference to the practice of astrology, which

places emphasis on the importance of certain years. The cultures of the day were “infested” with many belief systems, all competing for a following. Syncretism, Gnosticism, many pagan practices, and various forms of astrology were all circulating at the time. Readily available, they began creeping back into their customs having once been a big part of their belief system. Every religion, including the true religion, has observances of some kind at certain times. Therefore, it is easy to falsely assume Paul is speaking about the observances of the Sabbath or the annual festivals and holy days. The inclusion of “years” in the list gives some indication that he is not. Most likely, he is referring to these false religious observances.

 11 I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain.

 Paul is saying he is afraid for them, not of them. The Ferrar Fenton Translation renders the verse: “I fear for you, that I have worked among you in vain.” He is afraid because they returned to their old ways so quickly. Paul is jealous for them and wants to see them succeed.

12 Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am; for I am as ye are: ye

have not injured me at all.

13 Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the

gospel unto you at the first.

14 And my temptation, which was in my flesh, ye despised not,

nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ

Jesus.

15 Where is then the blessedness ye spoke of? For I bear you

record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out

your own eyes, and have given them to me.

 Paul wants them to follow his example—“be as I am”—in living according to “the way” Christ taught him and he was now teaching them. He comments, “For I am as you are,” meaning, I am a person just like you, facing the same trials of life. He goes on to mention

appreciatively that they showed him kindness and acceptance as though he was Christ himself or an angel, even though he had physical weaknesses and particularly poor vision. He says of them that their fondness was such that he perceives they would have given him their very own eyes if it were possible.

16 Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the

truth?

 Paul asks—now that he is correcting them—whether the relationship has changed and he is now to be considered their enemy?

17 They zealously affect you, but not well; yea, they would

exclude you, that ye might affect them.

18 But it is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing,

and not only when I am present with you.

19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until

Christ be formed in you,

20 I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice;

for I stand in doubt of you.

 Paul notices that these zealots are having an effect on the Galatians and creating a kind of zeal in them. He says those who would place this burden of circumcision on them are doing so for the wrong reasons. Paul knows that the zealots were not happy that his

Galatians were being “grafted in.” To some extent, he says, the zealots would rather exclude the Gentile converts. The zealots thought less of them than of other disciples and felt they would have polluted their “specialness” if they were included with them.

The apostle observes that zeal, in and of itself, is good if it is for a good purpose, but he tells the Galatians he wants them to be zealous for good things at all times, not just when he was with them. Paul calls them his “little children,” and he feels as though he is in birth pangs waiting for them to mature and have the mind of Christ. As he writes to them, he says he wishes he were actually present with them so that by his own voice he could convince them because, as it stands, he has his doubts that they are on the right track.

21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the

law?

22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a

bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh;

but he of the freewoman was by promise.

24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two

covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which genders to

bondage, which is Agar.

 Paul asks of those who want to be UNDER the law if they truly understand what that means for them. Again, he uses the expression “under the law” to differentiate those who saw the law as the means of salvation from those who understood that when we confess our sins we find grace through Christ as a result of His faithfulness and His sacrifice. He then shows the analogy found in Scripture of Abraham’s two sons, one born of his bondmaid Hagar and the other born of His wife Sarah. In the story of the actual historical account, Hagar was  indeed in bondage (the handmaid or bond servant) and Sarah was

indeed free. The son born to Hagar—Ishmael—had no claim to the promise of the inheritance God made to Abraham. God had said, “By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son: That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the

stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice” (Genesis 22:16–18).

So we see that God had made a promise to Abraham of a great inheritance for his seed, but this promise was to come only through Isaac, born of Sarah the free woman, which represented heavenly things, not through Ishmael, born of the bondmaid, which represented the physical. This analogy shows that it is only by what God

does—in this case, offer His promise—that His children should inherit His Kingdom. It was a promise made after Abraham had proven he was willing to sacrifice his only begotten son—as God Himself did— and it was through Isaac and his descendants that we actually have Jesus Christ appear, born to facilitate the promise that God would

indeed redeem mankind and establish a Kingdom with no end. This was to be a kingdom with its throne in Jerusalem—the New Jerusalem that comes down from heaven. The Jerusalem that exists at the time Paul speaks these words and even now is physical and offers no hope of this promise.

Christ says, “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name” (Revelation 3:12).

Through Ishmael no such progeny was given to redeem mankind.  So Sarah represents the plan of God fully executed by the sacrifice of Christ and the grace that it brings to all mankind. Hagar represents only the physical part of the plan—incomplete and without redemption from the penalty of death that only physical obedience can produce. Paul writes, “For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 6:20–23).

25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answers to

Jerusalem, which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

 Hagar represents a “condition without promise”—the promise of redemption. “She” is subject to all the physical limitations of her condition and represents those who do not have the promise of redemption—those who remain in bondage to (or under the penalty of) the law, who have not accepted Christ and what He accomplished. She is analogous to all the physical things of this life, physical obedience, and even the physical Jerusalem. When the law is broken, there can be no redemption through these things because they are without the promise. She therefore represents a condition that lacks the promise

of redemption. This part of the plan of God is cast away and replaced with the “better” covenant, which offers grace to those who accept Christ as their personal sacrifice and see Him as Lord—those who accept without reservation His authority in their lives.

26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

He refers to the NEW spiritual Jerusalem (symbolic of the inheritance of the Kingdom of Heaven), which is now made freely available to us. Paul continues the analogy pointing forward to this spiritual Jerusalem and the Kingdom of Heaven, which comes as a direct result of the promise made to Abraham through Isaac and his ultimate descendant Jesus Christ. Christ is the very one who is the Head of this Kingdom and serves in the role of the Husband of the Church, which is the New “Eve,” “mother of us all,” and bride to the second “Adam,” Jesus Christ our KING!

27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bears not; break

forth and cry, thou that travails not: for the desolate hath many

more children than she, which hath an husband.

This is a reference to the prophecy of Isaiah 54:1–8: “Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD. Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thine

habitations: spare not, lengthen thy cords, and strengthen thy stakes; For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left; and thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited. Fear not; for thou shalt not be ashamed: neither be thou

confounded; for thou shalt not be put to shame: for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth, and shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood any more. For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called. For the LORD hath called thee as

a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God. For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee. In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the LORD thy Redeemer.”

Paul’s ministry was to the Gentile nations—those who were not the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Israel)—and he is showing by these verses that God has not rejected them even if it appeared that way for a time. Now that they are “grafted in,” they too are part of the promise. He cites the prophecy of Isaiah 54 to underscore that this was always the plan of God. Those who have this husband—Christ—can rejoice, whether they are the descendants of Israel or not, as they too are part of the promise being brought into fruition as the Kingdom unfolds and expands with many children— just as God promised: “I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore”

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

 So Paul says that the Gentiles, just the same as the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Israel), are also the children of promise by the grace and faithfulness and sacrifice of Jesus Christ tying it all together as Christ was descendant from Israel upon whom the

promise was given. They were now “joined” into the promise by spiritual marriage to Christ.

29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him

that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be

heir with the son of the freewoman.

31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

 Paul concludes the chapter by pointing out that the Ishmaelites and the Israelites have been at odds with one another and were, as he says, “to this day,” still at odds with each other. And even in our day, if we consider current events, we find that this wrangling of cultures exists even now.

In this analogy Paul is contrasting purely physical obedience alone with obedience supported by the spiritual things. Paul often speaks of the battle between the physical and the spiritual plane. He writes, “For to be carnally minded [focused on physical things] is

death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God” (Romans 8:6–7).

Paul refers to the time when Hagar and Ishmael were “cast out” of the camp of Abraham so that Isaac could alone receive the inheritance promised to the son of Sarah, Abraham’s true wife. But now God has “grafted in” the Gentile nations—facilitated through the ministry of Paul so that they too are part of this promise. They understood and could relate to this historical account, as it was truly part of “their history.” This was then the basis of the analogy that the slavery of the past is now over and they—the Gentiles—are seen in the same favor by the “husband,” Jesus Christ! The analogy serves to explain the difference in the covenants—one to Israel alone, which relied on physical obedience and carried the bondage of the penalty of death; and the new and better covenant to all mankind, which relied on the faithfulness of Christ and the promise of redemption. Paul is telling them that they must not go back to rites and rituals to seek their redemption, but

to cast that way of thinking aside for the new and better way of accepting the sacrifice, authority, and advocacy of Christ as Lord— walking in the way that He said to walk, “and living according to every word of God”—not according to the doctrines of men.

Chapter 5

1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath

made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of

bondage.

2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ

shall profit you nothing.

3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he

is a debtor to do the whole law.

4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are

justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

Paul is not shy about standing up against those who would try to impose circumcision upon the Galatians. He implores them to STAND FAST and hold onto what he has taught them—that they are already “grafted in” to the promise through Christ, and there is no need to go back to the ritual of circumcision to establish their status as being part

of the promise. He is not telling them that they must reject the principles of the law but they must understand what about the law had changed. The priesthood, as administered by the Levites, was now replaced. It was replaced by the Priesthood administered by Christ and by what He had done and is doing for ALL mankind—not just for

the Israelites. The Jewish zealots had not accepted Christ and continued to administer a system that focuses on the law ONLY to the exclusion of grace. Paul is emphatic—there is no need to go back to a system that Christ had replaced and certainly not any of the rituals contained in that system, which were not part of the New Covenant. But

the issue here is not about what established righteousness—the law of God, which always remains in place—but rather, it was about who is and who is not included in the promise of redemption and inheritance in the Kingdom of God. Paul establishes that if you believe that it is only by physical things that you receive redemption then you are going backwards. You are missing the point and forsaking the grace provided by the perfection of Christ and His once-for-all sacrifice— you might as well go back to the Levitical system that Christ had replaced and do all the things contained in it. But you will find no

hope there, and having rejected Christ you are left only with your own weak efforts to achieve perfection and avoid the penalty for coming up short.

5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness

by faith.

6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision avails anything, nor

uncircumcision; but faith which works by love.

 Paul notes that we are not dependent upon physical things but upon the spiritual and, as such, we should have faith as we wait for our redemption, which we trust fully is now set firmly in place. It is not by some “identifying mark” such as circumcision that we are

made part of the promise of redemption but by the faithfulness of Christ having fulfilled and achieved what we could not. It is through Him that we have this hope.

7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey

the truth?

8 This persuasion comes not of him that calls you.

 Paul notes that, at first, they were doing well, but now he asks who is responsible for their failure to OBEY the truth. It is important to note that Paul actually stresses the importance of obedience here—but obedience to “the truth.” He says clearly that this “persuasion” that had taken hold among them was not coming from God—was not of Christ.

9 A little leaven leavens the whole lump.

10 I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be

none otherwise minded: but he that troubles you shall bear his

judgment, whosoever he be.

 In the analogy of making bread, it does not take much leaven for it to spread and leaven or “puff-up” all of the dough. Paul is concerned that these wrong ideas were beginning to infect and permeate the Galatian churches and that it would continue to spread if not dealt

with. He says he is confident that they would be affected by all of this, but the fault lies with the one (or ones) who are doing the “infecting” by bringing in these false ideas.

11 And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet

suffer persecution? Then is the offence of the cross ceased.

Paul is saying, “Look at what I am doing and saying!” He was concerned that some might have thought that he actually endorsed the idea of circumcision when he clearly did not. He explains that he was even being persecuted BECAUSE he was against such things. He was actually “getting into trouble” with the Jewish zealots because he preached Christ and Him crucified. The ramifications of these teachings were offensive to these Jewish zealots, as they never had accepted Christ in the first place, and if he were “in league” with them then his continual persecution by them would make no sense. His point

was to dispel any suggestion that he supported the idea of circumcision. Paul is not saying he was persecuted by Peter and the Jerusalem churches but only by those Jewish zealots who refused to accept Christ. He had clearly stated that the gospel Peter preached was THE SAME gospel that he (Paul) preached.

12 I would they were even cut off which trouble you.

The Fenton Translation renders this verse: “And I wish those who mutilate you would maim themselves.” Paul is showing his anger and mincing no words, directing his statements toward the zealots saying overtly that he wishes they would castrate themselves. In order to understand just who Paul is speaking about, one should ask this question: Would Paul make such a statement toward Peter and the Jerusalem apostles? No! It is clear he is speaking of those zealots who were perverting the gospel.

13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not

liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou

shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

 Paul continues to emphasize grace but cautions that grace does not give license to sin—“use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh.” But he does emphasize that LOVE was of high importance along with service to one another. He goes on to say that loving your neighbor as yourself fulfills the LAW. The “one word” he is referring to is LOVE—

and he goes on to use that “one word” as it applies to your neighbor. Notice that, by this discourse, he is saying THAT THE LAW EXISTS—is not done away, cast away, or set aside—that it is still important and actually “MAGNIFIED” by the concepts of love. Paul was taught directly by Christ and understands very well the importance of the relationship of love to the law.

When a rich young ruler asked Christ, “Master, which is the great commandment in the law?” Christ  answered, “Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets” (Matthew 22:36–40).

Again, Christ himself summarizes the Ten Commandments and shows that the concept of LOVE does not set aside the law but supports, buttresses, and magnifies it.

15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be

not consumed one of another.

 Paul admonishes them that arguing back and forth over these issues is destructive and would “consume them,” destroying the spiritual work of faith he had begun in them.

16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.

17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against

the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye

cannot do the things that ye would.

18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these;

Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath,

strife, seditions, heresies,

21 Envying, murders, drunkenness, raveling, and such like: of

the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past,

that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Paul consistently shows that “tapping into the Spirit of God” aligns us with the will of God, and by following that course we are not led to commit sin. If we do not sin then we do not come under the penalty of sin—“under the law.” He is talking about a “life direction,” not a weakness here or there but a pattern of behavior that manifests itself and is evidenced by these things some of which he lists here.

They are “fruits” of a carnal mind. This is a reiteration of his theme in the letter he wrote to the Romans where he says that “the carnal mind is enmity against God” (8:7). It is important to note that this list contains many of the things that are addressed in the Ten

Commandments, such as idolatry, adultery, and murder. Idolatry is part of the first four commandments, which express love toward God. Murder and adultery are part of the last six commandments, which express love toward our fellow man. He shows that these things are evidence of a person who is not following the lead of God’s Spirit but

is living a carnal life. He is clear that if a person does these things they are excluded from entry into the Kingdom of God showing that one could most definitely lose out and fall from grace and that grace is NOT AVAILABLE to those who willfully sin. And, remember, sin is the transgression of the law.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering,

gentleness, goodness, faith,

23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

24 And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the

affections and lusts.

25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

 He shows the fruits of living a spiritual life—that these things are evidence of that and that there is no law of God that militates against these things. If we are truly “grafted in” to Christ then we will not want to sin and God’s law will be written in our hearts.

Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 3:3, “Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.”

In Romans 2:12–15, he writes, “For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:  Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another.”

26 Let us not be desirous of vainglory, provoking one another,

envying one another.

The chapter ends with Paul directing everyone involved in this controversy to employ the LOVE of God as evidenced by the fruits that God’s Spirit is in them and “back off” from provocation or envy.

Chapter Six

1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

2 Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.

 Paul goes on to show that we are to use the spiritual guidance we receive to love our fellow man to help our brother—not out of vanity but in humility. Because, taking a vain approach would only make us vulnerable once again to the carnal mind, which is the enemy of the Spirit of God.

3 For if a man thinks himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself.

4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he

have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.

5 For every man shall bear his own burden.

 Paul exhorts that we should not examine or judge our own spiritual progress by comparing ourselves to one another, thinking we are somehow better than others. Rather, we should examine ourselves alone and keep it as a private matter between us and God. Each of us alone is responsible for our own spiritual growth. Then if we are found to be doing well based on God’s Word and His guidance, rejoice! But rejoice to ourselves.

6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him

that teaches in all good things.

Let those who are benefiting from the teachings share these good things with his teachers. Paul is directing that the good results, which come for those learning the truth, should be communicated to the teachers. It appears he is asking for “feedback” on their progress.

7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man

sows, that shall he also reap.

8 For he that sows to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that sows to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

 Here Paul gives a dire warning. We cannot fool God—if we are living a carnal life, we will reap the results of that way of life. We cannot take the grace of God and abuse it by sinning and having a wholesale disregard for His law. God knows our heart and our actions and judges accordingly. If we follow the correct path and live a “spiritual life” then the reward of everlasting life awaits us.

9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we

shall reap, if we faint not.

10 As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all

men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.

 As he reaches the end of the letter, Paul exhorts the Galatians to remain faithful and not to tire of doing good works, and that they should be patient, for if they continue faithfully they will indeed reap the reward God has promised to them. He reminds them that they

must always hold the church in special and high regard—doing good “especially to them who are of the household of faith.”

11 Ye see how large a letter [large letters] I have written unto

you with mine own hand.

 Paul’s letter was written in “large letters” because of the problem he had with his vision.

12 As many as desire to make a fair show in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ.

13 For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the

law; but desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in

your flesh.

 The Jewish zealots who saw themselves as “special” because of their heritage were imposing the ritual of circumcision upon the gentile churches when, apparently, some of them were not actually observing the tenets of the law. They were forcing this imposition

because they wanted to nullify the significance of what Christ had done on the cross in the minds of the Galatians, as they did not fully accept Christ in the role of Messiah. Therefore, they continued to cling to their own doctrines (doctrines of men) and were misappropriating the law to force their ideas on the Gentiles. In this argument, they were certainly hypocritical as they were using the law to press the point of  circumcision when they themselves were not keeping it. They were doing this to “win the argument” (to “glory in your flesh”) on the matter that one could not be part of Israel unless it was through heritage or by accepting circumcision as part of the “grafting in” process.

14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our

Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and

I unto the world.

15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails anything, nor

uncircumcision, but a new creature.

16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on

them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

 Paul shows disdain for the vanity of “winning the argument” and says that he would not “glory” in it but only that he would feel glory in what Christ had done for all of us. He says that he sees himself as separate from the world and the world as separate from him. He clearly saw his “citizenship” in a different place—in the Kingdom of God.

For when we consider what Christ has done, we realize that circumcision or uncircumcision amounts to nothing—it really doesn’t matter. Christ is totally sufficient for any and all who come to him— regardless of heritage. If people would accept this idea (rule) there would be peace and we could more abundantly experience the mercy upon both physical and spiritual Israel, which God has given to all of us, Jew and Gentile alike.

17 From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.

 Paul asks finally that he not be “troubled” with this anymore—he came to them after being personally taught by Jesus Christ and bears the evidence of that in his body. Essentially Paul is saying “that is that”—let’s have an end to this! It is not clear what he means by this but it could be that after he was struck blind on the road to Damascus

his vision problems remained as evidence of that event. This was something that was apparently obvious to all who saw him.

18 Brethren, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen.

 Paul concludes the letter by praying that the grace of Christ would be with them in their spirit, which is the very doctrine and point of the entire letter.

=============================================================

About the Author

Ed J. Szalankiewicz is an ordained minister serving the Church of God in the

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania area.

Other works can be viewed on the Internet by searching “Ed Szalankiewicz on

Hub Pages” or by going to this site:   http://hubpages.com/profile/Ed+Szalankiewicz

=============================================================

Published by the Church of God International, Tyler, Texas.

Text: Ed J. Szalankiewicz

Ten Commandments

We live in a world filled with lawlessness. In most societies, murder, theft, adultery, deceit, and perversity are commonplace. Many, even in religious communities and among human behavioral specialists, scoff at the idea of moral absolutes that apply universally. One man’s morality, it is believed, is another man’s immorality. What seems unnatural and abnormal to one is considered perfectly normal and natural for another.

In the last several decades, the Western World has witnessed an increasing acceptance of homosexual behavior as normal and natural, of abortion as a right, and of premarital cohabitation as a healthy alternative to marriage. Time-honored Judeo-Christian standards are being challenged, even by professing Christian clergymen, some of whom are calling for a new reformation, claiming that Christianity must abandon its belief in a God who punishes sinners and radically revise many of the moral standards it inherited from its predecessors.

But God does not change! He made human beings in His own image and after His likeness and gave them specific instructions on how they were to relate to Him and to each other. In other words, He gave them His HOLY LAW!

The Law of Love

God’s law is summarized in one word—love. When asked to identify the “great commandment in the law,” Jesus Christ replied,

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 22:37–40).

This is God’s law in its simplest form. The two commandments are an indissoluble unit—one law—and are universally binding. One cannot keep only one of the two commandments, for to hate one’s neighbor is to fail to love God, who commands one to love one’s neighbor. John put it this way:

If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. And this commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother (1 John 4:20–21).

John twice reminds us “God is love” (1 John 4:6,16). Genuine love flows from Him, and through loving Him (who first loved us), our capacity to express love is perfected. Therefore, to fail to love God with all our being is to fail to love our neighbor as we should. We see, then, that the commandments to love God with all our being and our neighbor as our self are two aspects of one indivisible law, with the two commandments so linked that it is impossible to obey one and not obey the other or break one without breaking the other. To break one point of the law of love is to fail to love; thus, the whole law is broken.

Interestingly, Jesus was not introducing a brand-new law when He named the two preeminent commandments. He was simply quoting from the Old Testament—right out of the old “Law of Moses.” The first commandment is a part of the famous Shema, or Hebrew confession of faith, which was recited in the synagogues every Sabbath; and the second commandment was taken from the book known for its exposition of the ceremonial law—the book of Leviticus.

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might (Deuteronomy 6:4–5).

You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD (Leviticus 19:18).

The law of love is also mentioned in the New Testament epistles (Romans 8:28; 13:8–9; 1 Corinthians 2:9; Galatians 5:14; 1 John 4:18–20; 5:2; James 1:12; 2:5–8), so there can be no doubt that this law was carried forward to the New Covenant. It is as binding today as it ever has been at any time in the past.

To fulfill God’s moral and ethical requirements, all you have to do is love Him with all your being and love your neighbor as yourself. Love, however, is not a mere sentiment or “warm fuzzy feeling.” On the contrary, love—godly love—“does not insist on its own way” (1 Corinthians 13:5). This means that the person possessing this kind of love is not guided by his or her natural inclinations or things that feel good. Genuine love involves loyalty, commitment, and generosity. It is a way of life, not a temporary emotional response.
God’s law of love, as we have noted, consists of two general commandments: You shall love God with all your being, and you shall love your neighbor as yourself. These two commandments, forming one indissoluble law, are further defined through the ten moral categories set forth in the Decalogue, or Ten Commandments.

The Decalogue: the Law of Love Spelled Out

One can easily prove from Scripture that the law of love and the Decalogue are one and the same law. The Decalogue, therefore, is an indissoluble unit of divine law. To break one of its commandments is to break the whole law. James put it this way:

If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law (James 2:8–11).

Notice these points: (1) The “whole law” James speaks of is the Decalogue. It has ten “points,” and James cites two of those points. (2) James sees the Decalogue as an indivisible unit of law. To “stumble in one point” is to be “guilty of all,” for the individual commandments come from one Source. (3) The “royal law”—“You shall love your neighbor as yourself”—is obviously a summation of the commandments that pertain to human relationships. James links the “royal law” with the “whole law,” or Decalogue.
Jesus, in His reply to a wealthy young man inquiring about what “good deed” he should do to have eternal life, said, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments” (Matthew 19:17). When the young man asked, “Which ones?” Jesus replied by naming five of the Ten Commandments, each having to do with human relationships, and summarized these by citing the commandment, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (verses 18–19). Doubtless, Jesus intended to equate the command to love one’s neighbor with the commandments concerning murder, adultery, stealing, bearing false witness, and honoring one’s parents. It was a summation commandment, not merely one more law in a list of laws.
The apostle Paul affirms the same principle in Romans 13:8–10:

Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

Here, Paul is dealing only with those commandments that concern human relationships. In other writings, he clearly condemns blasphemy, idolatry, and other sins that are committed against God in a more direct sense.

Two points stand out here: First, the passage makes clear that the “word,” “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” is a summary of the specific commandments (of the Decalogue) pertaining to human relationships. Second, Paul shows that Christians do have a responsibility to fulfill the law. If the law Paul refers to had been abolished, as some claim, the apostle would not speak of the Christian’s responsibility of fulfilling its requirements.

So, plainly, the law of love, consisting of ten cardinal points, was carried forward to the New Covenant. These ten points are ten moral categories that transcend the Abrahamic and Sinaitic Covenants. They were central to the Old Covenant, and they are central to the New Covenant.

Centrality of the Ten Commandments

In Exodus 34:28, the “Ten Commandments” are called the “words of the covenant which He commanded you to perform.” In Deuteronomy 4:13, “His covenant” is identified as the “Ten Commandments,” which God wrote “on tablets of stone.” And in Deuteronomy 9:9, the stone tablets on which the Ten Commandments were written are called the “tablets of the covenant.”

Because of these passages, some argue that the Decalogue is the Covenant. They further argue that since the first covenant was abolished with the advent of the New Covenant (Hebrews 8:13), the whole law—including the Ten Commandments—was abolished.

At first glance, the passages cited above do seem to say the Ten Commandments and the Old Covenant are one and the same. But other scriptures show plainly that the Old Covenant includes civil and ceremonial laws as well (Jeremiah 34:13–14; Ezekiel 44:6–8; Hebrews 9:1). The Old Covenant included all the terms and promises set forth in the Pentateuch. The Covenant was the agreement God made with Israel, and its terms included all the civil, ceremonial, and moral laws God gave to Israel.

Why, then, do the passages cited earlier speak of the Ten Commandments as if they were the entire content of the Old Covenant? The answer is that the Ten Commandments are central to the Covenant. As Jesus says, the Law and the Prophets “hang on” the commandments to love God with all one’s being and love one’s neighbor as one’s self, which we have identified as a two-point summary of the Ten Commandments. The Decalogue could be described as the hub of the Covenant law. Without a central moral law, the ceremonial, sacrificial, and civil laws become meaningless. How can the bloody sacrifices serve as a reminder of the sin problem if there is no central moral law to define sin? How can transgressions be punished if there is no central moral law identifying transgressions?

The following points further underscore the preeminence of the Decalogue:

  • God gave the Ten Commandments to Israel by voice (Exodus 20:1,19; Deuteronomy 5:22), giving them special emphasis in the midst of many other commandments.
  • God, not Moses, wrote the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone (Deuteronomy 5:22; 10:1–4), symbolizing their permanency and revealing their special place among the commandments, statutes, and judgments of the Covenant.
  • The tablets of stone were kept inside the Ark of the Covenant (Deuteronomy 10:5), symbolizing their preeminence and centrality in the Covenant.

It should be obvious to anyone that the Ten Commandments stand high above the other commandments, statutes, and judgments of the law. As a unit of law central to the Covenant, the Decalogue consists of ten moral categories that are foundational to the other components of the law. For instance, all the sexual abominations named in Leviticus 18—adultery, incest, bestiality, and homosexuality—are covered under the moral category established by the Seventh Commandment: “You shall not commit adultery.” The Ninth Commandment—“You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor”—specifically forbids a false testimony that might lead to harm for one’s neighbor. But the broad principle established by this moral category precludes all dishonesty and falsehood, whether expressed by voice or through one’s actions. The annual holy days of Leviticus 23 are rooted in the principle established through the Fourth Commandment: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.”

The Ten Commandments, as the fundamental moral law, are also central to the New Covenant. God, through the prophet Jeremiah, reveals some of the main differences between the Old and New Covenants.

Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, “Know the LORD,” for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more (Jeremiah 31:31–34).

Notice three points on how the New Covenant differs from the Old:

  1. “…for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest….” To know God is to experience spiritual regeneration through the power of the Holy Spirit. Membership in the Old Covenant community did not require spiritual regeneration. One cannot be a member of the New Covenant community without spiritual regeneration.
  2. “For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” As the writer of the book of Hebrews tells us, the Old Covenant sacrifices, offered continually year after year, could never “make perfect those who draw near” by permanently removing the people’s sins (Hebrews 10:1–4). Every year, the sin-offering ceremony on the Day of Atonement reminded the people that the sin problem was ever present and pictured a time when something would be done about it. The New Covenant differs in that “by a single offering he [Christ] has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified” (verse 14). “Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin” (verse 18). Christ’s once-for-all-time sacrifice is the solution to the sin problem. Everyone under the New Covenant is forgiven.
  3. “I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts.” There can be no doubt that the “law” spoken of here is the Decalogue. God’s promise to “write it on their hearts” obviously alludes to His writing the commandments on tablets of stone when the previous covenant was established. The people who first received this prophecy must have immediately connected God’s action of writing the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone with His future action of writing His law on the people’s hearts. They understood the “law” to be the very same law that was central to the first covenant. That law was the Decalogue, the basic moral law that stands high above all the other commandments, statutes, and judgments contained in the Old Covenant.

In summary, the law of the Old and New Covenants is the same law but written in different places. In the Old Covenant, the Ten Commandments were written on tablets of stone. In the New Covenant, the same commandments are written in the heart.

The Ten Commandments in the New Testament

Jesus said it plainly:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:17–19).

This is not a “hard saying.” It is abundantly clear! The Law and the Prophets—the whole of God’s previous revelation—will remain in effect until the consummation of the ages, the eschaton, when the old creation is replaced entirely with a new heaven and new earth.

Jesus “fulfills” the Law and the Prophets, not by abolishing them, but (1) by fulfilling the Messianic prophecies contained in both the Law (Pentateuch) and the Prophets, (2) by perfectly modeling the moral requirements of Scripture, and (3) by expounding the original intent of God’s laws and exposing the erroneous interpretations and applications the scribes and Pharisees had adopted.

Having declared that He had not come to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to fulfill, Jesus goes on to bring out the original intent of several Old Testament precepts. He does not abolish or even radically revise Old Testament law; He simply corrects erroneous teachings about the law. Murder and adultery were always matters of the heart as much as physical actions. Marriage did not become sacred and binding at the advent of the New Covenant; it was sacred and binding from the very beginning. The oath laws of the Old Testament were given to encourage faithfulness and truthfulness but had been so corrupted by the Pharisees that Jesus advised to avoid oaths altogether.

Jesus and the writers of the New Testament emphasized the spiritual intent of the law and the fact that the law identifies the sinful condition of the unregenerate heart. Each specific transgression of God’s commandments emanates from the old, unregenerate self. For this reason, the apostle Paul could say that “sin” is both an act and a condition.

For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me (Romans 7:18–20).

It is the unregenerate condition of the heart that produces acts of sin, and Paul identifies that condition as “sin that dwells within me.” But without a law that identifies sinful acts, the sinful condition of the heart goes unrecognized. Paul therefore says, “So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good” (Romans 7:12), and, “For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin” (verse 14).

Several New Testament passages show clearly that the Ten Commandments remain in force today and continue their function of identifying sin and sinners.

As previously noted, both Jesus and Paul identified the commandment, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” with several commandments of the Decalogue (Matthew 19:16–19; Romans 13:8–10), showing that the Ten Commandments are still in force. James, as previously noted, cited the Sixth and Seventh Commandments and stated, “If you do not commit adultery [break the Seventh Commandment] but do murder [break the Sixth Commandment], you have become a transgressor of the law” (James 2:11). He confirmed the unity of the Decalogue when he said, “For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it” (verse 10).

A particularly interesting passage is in Paul’s epistle to the Ephesians:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. “Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), “that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land” (Ephesians 6:1–3).

Notice that Paul urges the Ephesian youth to obey the Fifth Commandment and reminds them that the promise accompanying the commandment applies to them. The original promise was aimed at Israelites living in the Promised Land (cf. Exodus 20:12), but Paul understands that both the commandment and the promise apply to Gentile converts living in Ephesus, a city on the western coast of Asia Minor. Paul recognizes the universal scope of this commandment.

Having established, then, that the Ten Commandments remain in force as the moral law written on the hearts of the members of the New Covenant community, let’s look more closely at each of the commandments.

The First Commandment

I am the LORD your God.…You shall have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:2– 3; Deuteronomy 5:6–7).

The First Commandments identifies the Author of the Decalogue and forbids worship of anyone or anything apart from, or in addition to, Him. The expression “before me” means not only “ahead of me” but also “besides me.” Israel was to worship only the one God. This commandment identifies the true God as the One who “brought you [Israel] out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery” (verse 2) and separates Him from the myriad of false gods worshiped in the ancient world. The same God who delivered Israel from Egyptian bondage delivers people today from the spiritual bondage of sin and the false religions and philosophies of this world. Now, as then, this commandment has first place among the ten moral categories identified in the Decalogue.

God Alone is Worthy of Worship

Scripture reveals plainly that there is only one true God, the Creator of the cosmos. This is both a fact of divine revelation and the conclusion of sound scientific investigation and uncorrupted reason. Creation reveals the existence of a Creator. Design reveals the existence of a Designer. Even many of the ancient philosophers were able to observe nature and, through logic, conclude that God exists, though some of their ideas about Him were flawed.

Anyone should be able to see that it makes no sense to worship anything that is not God. But once we know God exists, it makes no sense not to worship Him. He gives us life, breath, the ability to think, reason, plan—all that we have, our very existence—so we owe all to Him.

As noted earlier, Jesus Christ models moral perfection, thus setting the example for the New Covenant community. When the devil offered Him “all the kingdoms of the world and their glory” if He would but “fall down and worship” him (Matthew 4:8–9), Jesus replied, “Be gone Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve’” (verse 10; cf. Deuteronomy 6:13).

While most people would instantly recoil at the very thought of worshiping the devil, it is nevertheless true that if we live to gratify the “desires of the body and the mind,” we are yielding to the “prince of the power of the air [Satan], the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience” (Ephesians 2:2–3). This is precisely what Adam and Eve did in the Garden of Eden. By relinquishing their God-given dominion to Satan, they gave first place to the devil. They broke the First Commandment.

Consequences of Rejecting God

The apostle Paul, describing the unfortunate legacy of sinful man, says that the ancients “exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator” (Romans 1:25). Once they rejected God, they plunged headlong into gross immorality. Soon, they were “filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless” (verses 29–31).

As noted earlier, the Ten Commandments are a unified whole. Rejecting God—breaking the First Commandment—results in breaking all His commandments, a wholesale abandonment of the moral law.

We see this ugly phenomenon in today’s world. Atheistic philosophers speak of “moral atheism,” claiming that morality is not rooted in a belief in God. But the “morality” they speak of is a “morality” of their own making. They decide whether abortion and homosexual practice are morally acceptable. They decide whether marriage is between one man and one woman or between persons of the same sex, or whether sex outside marriage is right or wrong. They decide what is right and wrong, good and evil. For them, morality is a relative term.

But atheism is not the only philosophy that puts God out of the picture. Many who believe God exists and who even say they believe the Bible is His inspired Word refuse to put Him first, which is what the First Commandment demands. They believe God exists, but they do not retain God in their knowledge. They put him out of their minds as they go about fulfilling the lusts of their flesh.

Believing in God is not the same as loving God. And one who does not love God does not put God first—does not “have no other gods before” the true God. Deuteronomy 6:5 captures the full intent of the First Commandment: “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.”

Loving God is equated with keeping His commandments in Deuteronomy 20:6. John says “we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments” (1 John 2:3), adding, “Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected” (verses 4–5).

So merely believing in God is not enough. “Even the demons believe—and shudder” (James 2:19). The belief that is acceptable to God is an active belief—a belief motivated by putting God first. Such faith begins with the First Commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me!”

The Second Commandment

You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them (Exodus 20:4–5; Deuteronomy 5:8).

The Second Commandment is closely associated with the First. In fact, some churches, following Augustine’s enumeration of the Decalogue, include the prohibitions against other gods and idols under one commandment. This seems sensible since hand-carved idols are “other gods.” Those of us who prefer to read these as two commandments do so because the first one tells us whom we are to worship, and the second one tells us how we are to worship Him.

“God is spirit,” Jesus said, “and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24). Worshiping in “spirit and truth” precludes the use of idols, for no man-made image can truthfully portray the incomprehensible God. We are to worship God only in the manner He tells us to worship Him.

Ancient Idolaters

Hand-carved idols were pervasive in the ancient world. The Israelites were exposed to idolatry in Egypt, and God knew that the influence of idolatrous worship would likely affect His people, since it was so widespread and they were so familiar with it. He also knew that the use of idols would produce a distorted concept of His nature and lead to other practices He did not approve. So He gave Israel a commandment forbidding such worship.

Many who practice idolatry today claim they use images as reminders of the “god” those images represent, insisting they are not actually worshiping the image itself. No doubt, the pagan idolaters of the ancient world made the same claim. While the ancients probably believed special benefits were imparted through images of those deities, they believed the “gods” they worshiped dwelt in an otherworldly realm. In some cases, the so-called gods were real beings; they were demons.

Idolatry existed long before Moses. Laban, Jacob’s father-in-law, was an idolater (Genesis 31:30–37). When God told Jacob to go to Bethel and make an altar there to God, Jacob had his household and associates to put away the “foreign gods which were in their hands” (Genesis 35:1–4). Jacob knew that idolatry was not compatible with the worship of God, so he had all those traveling with him purify themselves by getting rid of the idols they had picked up (perhaps while they were living in Shechem). This shows that the second point of the law God would later give to Israel at Mount Sinai was already a part of the moral law in the days of the Patriarchs.

Idolatrous Israelites

Idolatry was a major problem throughout the history of ancient Israel. At times, the Israelites combined idolatry with the worship of Yahweh, the true God. The first incident, which occurred in the wilderness while Moses was in the mountain, was an attempt to worship Yahweh through use of a gold calf they had made (Exodus 32:1–6). The molded calf was apparently seen as a representation of the God who had brought Israel out of Egypt (verse 4), and it was used in a “feast to the LORD” Aaron had proclaimed (verse 5).

Rather than wait for Moses to return from the mountain with God’s instructions, the children of Israel chose to follow their own desires. In their “feast to the LORD,” they “sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play” (verse 6), putting their own self-centered desires ahead of God’s will. Idolatry, then, involves shaping God according to one’s own desires.

The Israelites could not have retained a proper understanding of God and how they were to relate to Him had they been permitted to worship Him through the calf image. In time, their use of the gold calf would so alter their concept of God that they would see Him as merely one of many gods. The calf image would reduce Him to creaturely status and inevitably have spiritual and moral repercussions. Soon, prostitution, adultery, and sexual perversity would be a “normal” part of religious practice, as it was in the pagan cultures surrounding Israel. God would be seen as a temperamental being who had to be pacified from time to time through animal and, possibly, human sacrifices. He would be seen as indifferent where ethics and morality were concerned, and the Covenant would be reduced to a “deal” in which material rewards are exchanged for sacrifices.

The First Commandment rules out polytheism altogether. The Second Commandment reinforces the First by excluding any image as an object of worship. Here, again, we see the logical order of the Decalogue. The Second Commandment naturally follows the First, and these two, along with the Third and Fourth, form the most essential principles of the great overarching edict, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:4–5).

Idolatry and the New Testament Church

The problem of idolatry led to disaster for Israel and posed a threat in the New Testament period. Paul knew “that an idol has no real existence” (1 Corinthians 8:4) but warned of the danger associated with eating meat offered to idols. He pointed out that “some, through former association with idols, eat food as really offered to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled” (verse 7). He also cautioned that those who could eat meat sacrificed to idols without consciousness of the idol and with a clear conscience could easily cause a “weak” brother to stumble (verse 10).

After citing Israel’s problem with idolatry, the apostle urges, “Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry” (1 Corinthians 10:14). Anything that smacks of idolatry should be avoided, not because an idol is anything, but because “what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God,” and any participation in idolatrous practice means being “participants with demons” (verse 20). Such a practice has no place in Christian fellowship or in the commemoration of Christ’s self-sacrifice (verse 21).

Paul refers to the warning associated with the Second Commandment when he asks, “Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He?” (verse 22). In His prohibition against idolatry, God said, “…for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments” (Exodus 20:5).

In the book of Revelation, Christ sternly warns the churches that tolerate false teachers who teach believers “to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols” (Revelation 2:20). In this case, eating things sacrificed to idols was actual participation in idolatrous practice. New Testament scholar Paul A. Rainbow summarizes the problem confronting Christians in Asia Minor:

One apocalyptic expectation looked for antichrist to set himself up as an object of worship.… John saw this partially fulfilled in the imperial cult, as enforced in proconsular Asia in the last decade of the first century, with its priests, counterfeit miracles, ventriloquistic use of statues and economic or capital punishment of Christians who would not offer incense or decorate their doors for civic processions (Rev 13:11–17)” (P.A. Rainbow, Dictionary of the Later New Testament & Its Developments, InterVarsity Press, p. 530).

To refuse participation in the idolatrous practices associated with emperor worship and trade-guild festivities was to risk economic privation or even capital punishment. To avoid these dreadful consequences, the false teachers—including advocates of the “teaching of Balaam” and “teaching of the Nicolaitans” (Revelation 2:14–15) and “that woman Jezebel” (verse 20)— apparently adopted and advocated a philosophy that “justified” Christian participation in these customs.

Idolatry Today

Various forms of idolatry still exist today. It is common in polytheistic religions, and it exists even among professing Christians.

Religious art is not necessarily wrong, but any work of art that creates a false concept of God or distorts the true Gospel is certainly not acceptable, especially when such an object is perceived to have mystical, magical, or sacramental value. One professing Christian “visionary,” for example, claimed that his pocket icon of Jesus imparted special graces. Not only is this an illegitimate use of artwork; it is flagrant idolatry—a clear violation of the Second Commandment.

It is true that great spiritual benefits are imparted from the living Christ to true Christians, but to claim that icons or statues serve as “sacraments” through which those benefits are imparted to the believer is completely foreign to the revelation of Scripture. Such a claim is reminiscent of the pagan practice of worshiping God or “gods” through molded and hand-carved images.

Idolatry is more than an outward act or practice. Like other sins, the outward expression reflects a condition of the heart. Even false concepts about God can be idolatrous. If our mental portrait of God is based on what we want Him to be rather than what Scripture reveals Him to be, we harbor the spirit of idolatry.

In Ephesians 5:5, Paul identifies one who is “covetous” as an “idolater,” declaring that no such person “has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.” In Colossians 3:5, the apostle equates “covetousness” (translated “greed” in the New International Version) with “idolatry.” Explained, “This attitude is identified with idolatry because it puts self-interest and things in the place of God” (Expositor’s Bible Commentary).

Paul names “idolatry” in his list of “works of the flesh” (Galatians 5:19–20). Peter includes “lawless idolatry” in his list of evil deeds (1 Peter 4:3). And Christ warns, “But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8).

Idolatry has no place in the life of a Christian.

“Little children,” urges John, “keep yourselves from idols” (1 John 5:21).

The Third Commandment

You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain (Exodus 20:7; Deuteronomy 5:11).

The “name” of God is more than merely a term we use to identify Him. His name is His reputation; it is who and what He is. The Third Commandment forbids the misuse of any of the names or titles we use to identify Him. A stern warning accompanies the commandment: “…for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain” (Exodus 20:7). The positive side of the Third Commandment is a directive to praise and honor God in our thoughts, our speech, and our actions.

Anyone who does not respect God’s name does not properly respect God, so he is guilty of breaking the First Commandment. His disregard for the sacred indicates he puts his self-interests in the place of God, so he is also guilty of breaking the Second Commandment. Again, we see how the Ten Commandments form a unit wherein each point overlaps with the other points of the law.

Profanity

The Third Commandment is violated through common profanity. We hear it in the workplace, on the playing field, in movies and television sitcoms, and on the street. For many, it’s a habit. Tens of thousands thoughtlessly sprinkle their speech with “God” and “Jesus,” using these terms as fillers and exclamatory expressions without giving a second thought to the profane nature of their language.

Even “religious” people have been known to abuse God’s name in this habitual and thoughtless manner. Yet, God strongly condemns the misuse of His name. In Israel, the punishment for this sin was severe: “Whoever blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death” (Leviticus 24:16).

Paul’s advice is rooted in the moral category set forth in the Third Commandment. “Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths,” the apostle says, “but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear” (Ephesians 4:29).

While any abuse of the names and titles of God and Christ are certainly a violation of the Third Commandment, most people who clutter their speech with profanity probably do so as a matter of habit rather than a malevolent or premeditated motive of expressing disdain for the Deity. Swearing in God’s name to deliberately mask falsehood is another matter.

Swearing Falsely

The term “vain” in “You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain” is translated from the Hebrew word shav, which may be rendered “falsehood.” The Third Commandment forbids taking God’s name with falsehood. This commandment, therefore, condemns swearing falsely. To testify falsely under oath (“in God’s name”) is a direct violation of this commandment, as is invoking God’s name in an oath that is not going to be kept. Such acts link God with a lie and is therefore an abomination in the eyes of the One who “cannot lie” (Titus 1:2).

God says, “And you shall not swear by My name falsely, nor shall you profane the name of your God: I am the LORD” (Leviticus 19:12). This verse expands our understanding of the Third Commandment. God’s name is abused through false oaths and through vulgar use of His name.

In Deuteronomy 6:13, Israel is told to “fear the LORD your God” and “take oaths in His name.” This presupposes truthful oaths, for proper respect for God encourages truthfulness, especially when God’s name is invoked.

Jesus discouraged swearing (Matthew 5:34), but He did not mean there is never a right reason to take an oath. The Old Testament has many examples of righteous persons taking oaths in the name of God and, as we have seen, gives instructions on taking oaths. Paul called on God as a witness to the truthfulness of his statements (2 Corinthians 1:23; Galatians 1:20). This is essentially the same kind of oath or affirmation required of witnesses in a court of law.

Jesus’ negative view of oaths should be understood in light of corruption of Old Testament oath laws. Jesus says,

Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, “You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.” But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. And do not take an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. Let what you say be simply “Yes” or “No”; anything more than this comes from evil (Matthew 5:33–37).

Jesus is not overturning the oath laws of the Old Testament. On the contrary, He is upholding and magnifying the underlying principle of the oath laws. First, the oath laws encourage truthfulness. Jesus requires His disciples to be truthful in all their obligations and affirmations. Their word was to be as good as an oath. Second, Jesus has in view the common notion that swearing in the name of God and swearing toward Jerusalem were binding, while swearing by heaven and earth or by the temple were not binding at all. In a world where oaths are often used to sidestep truthfulness, it is best not to swear at all.

Jesus condemns this corrupt practice in His powerful polemic against the Pharisees:

Woe to you, blind guides, who say, “If anyone swears by the temple, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.” You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred? And you say, “If anyone swears by the altar, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gift that is on the altar, he is bound by his oath.” You blind men! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? So whoever swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. And whoever swears by the temple swears by it and by him who dwells in it. And whoever swears by heaven swears by the throne of God and by him who sits upon it (Matthew 23:16–22).

All the things Jesus mentions—the temple, the gold in the temple, the altar, the gift on the altar, and heaven itself—relate to God; thus, swearing by any of these things is the same as swearing “by the throne of God and him who sits upon it.” The phony oaths He condemns are a violation of the Third Commandment.

The Name of Christ

James apparently has the same blasphemous “oath” practice in mind when he urges, “But above all, my brothers, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your ‘yes’ be yes and your ‘no’ be no, so that you may not fall under condemnation” (James 5:12). Christ is the head of His body, the church. He is “called Faithful and True” (Revelation 19:11), “and the name by which he is called is The Word of God” (verse 13). Reckless oaths on the part of members of Christ’s body do not concur with the Head of the body, so oaths—especially in a world where oaths are suspect—should simply be avoided. They can lead to dishonoring the Head, resulting in condemnation.

James points out that when the rich oppress poor Christians and drag them into court, they “blaspheme the honorable name by which you were called” (James 2:7). Since the poor saints belong to Christ, to treat them badly is to blaspheme the name of the One who owns them. Just as swearing by the temple is swearing by Him who dwells in it, so mistreating those indwelt by the Spirit of Christ is to blaspheme the name of Christ.

From this we can see that when a person identifies himself as a Christian but does not live accordingly, he dishonors the name by which He is called. He is guilty of breaking the Third Commandment.

Living inconsistently with one’s profession of faith can also lead unbelievers to blaspheme God’s name. Paul writes, “You who boast in the law dishonor God by breaking the law. For, as it is written, ‘The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you’” (Romans 2:23–24). Similarly, those who openly claim Christ as their Savior but are seen abusing alcohol or known for immoral behavior can cause unbelievers to speak despairingly of the name of Christ and of Christianity. For this reason (among others), an “overseer”—an elder or pastor—“must be above reproach” (1 Timothy 3:2).

On the positive side, Christians who let their lights shine by expressing their love for others through good works and godly behavior may lead others to “give glory to your Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 5:16).

This principle goes to the heart of the Third Commandment. Rather than abuse God’s name or allow our words or actions to lead others to blaspheme the name of God, God’s people are to worship and honor Him in all they say, think, and do. As noted previously, this is the positive side of the Third Commandment.
“The LORD is great in Zion; he is exalted over all the peoples. Let them praise your great and awesome name.… Exalt the LORD our God; worship at his footstool! Holy is he!” (Psalm 99:2–3, 5).

The Fourth Commandment

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy (Exodus 20:8; Deuteronomy 5:12).

The first three commandments of the Decalogue forbid worshiping other gods, corrupting worship through idolatry, and abusing God’s name. As noted, the First Commandment tells us whom we are to worship, and the Second Commandment tells us how we are to worship Him. The Third and Fourth Commandments provide further instructions on how we are to worship Him.

Many believe nine of the Ten Commandments were brought forward to the New Covenant, the Fourth Commandment being the only exception. Apparently, some suppose that the command to keep the Sabbath holy is more ceremonial than moral, and that it is the one commandment that cannot be naturally discerned.

It is true that nothing in nature indicates that the seventh day is any different from the other days of the week, but to suggest that the Fourth Commandment is devoid of moral content is clearly erroneous. What can be more “moral” than a Sabbath of holy worship?

All our time belongs to God. We are to honor Him every day in all that we do, but He established the seven-day week and commands that we devote one day—the seventh day—of every week as a day of rest and time for special worship. The seventh day is “a Sabbath of solemn rest, a holy convocation” on which “no work” is to be done (Leviticus 23:3; cf. Exodus 20:9–10; Deuteronomy 5:13–14). It is a divinely appointed time for God’s people to assemble in worship, sing praises and offer thanks to Him, and build one another up in faith, love, and hope.

The Sabbath is rooted in God’s creative and redemptive acts. In Exodus 20, the Sabbath is linked with God’s work of creation (verse 11). In Deuteronomy 5, the Sabbath is linked with God’s work of delivering Israel from Egypt (verse 15). Thus, the Sabbath is both a celebration of creation and of redemption. This means the Sabbath has special significance for members of the New Covenant community, for they are a “new creation” in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15) and have been redeemed through the blood of Christ from the bondage of sin (Romans 3:24; Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14; 1 Peter 1:18–19).

A Covenant Sign for Israel

In Exodus 31, God links the Sabbath with His creative acts and the redemption of Israel and, in this light, emphasizes the critical importance of keeping the Sabbath.

And the LORD said to Moses, “You are to speak to the people of Israel and say, ‘Above all you shall keep my Sabbaths, for this is a sign between me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I, the LORD, sanctify you. You shall keep the Sabbath, because it is holy for you. Everyone who profanes it shall be put to death. Whoever does any work on it, that soul shall be cut off from among the people. Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day shall be put to death. Therefore the people of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, observing the Sabbath throughout their generations, as a covenant forever. It is a sign forever between me and the people of Israel that in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed’ ” (Exodus 31:12–17).

The expression “Above all” emphasizes the importance of keeping the seventh day holy, and the sentence of death for breaking the Sabbath underscores the gravity of this sin. The day is to serve as a perpetual sign of the Covenant, reminding the people of Israel that God, the Creator of heaven and earth, redeemed them from Egypt and set them apart as His special people. It was not a “god” who delivered Israel from bondage; it was the God—the one and only true God, Maker of the heavens and the earth—who redeemed the people of Israel and made them His special people. The Sabbath was to perpetually signify all this.

Unfortunately, Israel “greatly profaned” the Sabbath (Ezekiel 20:13). Because of this and other grave sins, God refused to bring the Exodus generation into the Promised Land. But profaning the Sabbath did not cease with the Exodus generation. It was a major problem throughout the history of Israel.
The prophets often singled out the Sabbath because it stood for the whole law. They understood that the Sabbath was a sign of the Covenant, so when they spoke of profaning the Sabbath they were speaking of Israel’s unfaithfulness to the Covenant in general.

The fact that the Sabbath was given to the people of Israel while they were in the wilderness (Exodus 16) and served as a sign of the Covenant God made with them at Sinai, separating them from the other nations, has led some to conclude that the Sabbath was for Israel only and is inseparable from the Mosaic Covenant.

As we shall see, however, the Sabbath long predates the Mosaic Covenant.

A Creation Ordinance

Many claim that the Sabbath was first instituted in the time of Moses, but the commandment itself points to a much earlier origin. All the Israelites and the sojourners who dwelt among them were to refrain from work on the Sabbath, “For in six day the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy” (Exodus 20:10–11).

When did God bless and make holy the Sabbath day? Shortly after He delivered Israel from the land of Egypt? In the wilderness during the time of Moses?

No! Genesis 2 tells of the origin of the Sabbath:

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God finished his work that he had done, and he rested [ceased] on the seventh day from all his work that he had done. So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it God rested from all his work that he had done in creation (Genesis 2:1–3).

The Sabbath and the marriage covenant (Genesis 2:22–24) have been called the two great creation ordinances. Both were instituted at the beginning of human history. It is illogical to assume that the latter is permanently binding while the former would remain in suspension until the time of Moses and later be abolished.

The entire creation narrative focuses on the arrival of man. God prepares an environment suitable for humans and then creates man and puts him in a place specially prepared for him. On the seventh day—the day after man’s creation—God “rests” from His work and makes the seventh day holy. This is the first recorded example of God making a thing holy. Obviously, the Sabbath was not created in a vacuum, as if God’s making the seventh day holy were unrelated to the origin of man. God was not exhausted; He didn’t need to rest. When He “rested” and made the seventh day holy, He had man in view. The Sabbath was made for man. It signifies communion between the Creator and the creature who bears the Creator’s image.

The Sabbath was instituted long before there were any Jews. It took on new meaning under the Mosaic Covenant, but it predates the Covenant by many centuries. Its new function as a sign of the Mosaic Covenant could not negate its previous function as a creation ordinance signifying God’s relationship with man; nor could the cancellation of the Covenant nullify the Sabbath or its original function and intent.

Some argue that there is no evidence that the patriarchs who lived before Moses kept the Sabbath. This, they claim, is evidence that the Sabbath was unknown before the time of Moses, and that the Sabbath rest of the creation narrative simply reflects a Mosaic interpretation.

Indeed, while we could show from the book of Genesis that worshiping false gods, idolatry, blasphemy, dishonoring parents, murder, adultery, theft, lying, and covetousness were all sins long before the time of Moses, there is no passage stating that any one of the patriarchs kept the Sabbath. There’s no mention of the righteous men and women who lived before Moses resting on the Sabbath. But we do find some bits of information that may suggest an awareness of the Sabbath before the time of Moses.

In Genesis 26:5, God says, “Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” The mention of “commandments…statutes…and laws” suggests a system of law was in place in the time of Abraham. If this system of law included commandments against serving false gods, idolatry, blasphemy, adultery, and so on, we may logically assume that the creation ordinance of the Sabbath was included as well.

Genesis 29:27–28 shows that the “week” was known in the days of the patriarchs. With Mosaic authorship as a given, we might assume that the week known to the patriarchs was seven days in duration. An awareness of the weekly cycle of seven days may also be suggested in Noah’s sending out a dove from the ark every seven days until the dove did not return (Genesis 8:10–12).

Since the seven-day week instituted at creation concludes with the Sabbath day, it is reasonable to think that the week known to the patriarchs was the seven-day week and that they kept the Sabbath. Of course, the passages cited above do not prove this, but they do provide evidence for that possibility. In any case, the lack of clear references to the Sabbath in the accounts of the patriarchs’ lives does not support the view that the Sabbath was unknown to them. A section of Scripture that covers a vast period of Israel’s history makes no mention of the Sabbath or anyone keeping it, though we know it was being kept during that time. So the lack of any mention of the Sabbath in the Genesis narratives proves nothing.

Jesus and the Sabbath

Jesus Christ was an observant Jew. He called the temple “my Father’s house” (John 2:16; cf. Matthew 23:16–22), upheld tithing laws (Matthew 23:23), recommended Mosaic sacrifices (Luke 5:14), taught in the synagogues on Sabbath days (Mark 6:2; Luke 4:16; 6:6; 13:10), and observed festivals (Matthew 26:17–20; Luke 2:41–42; 22:15; John 7:10). He clearly respected customs normally deemed “Jewish.”

While He respected “Jewish” institutions such as the temple and priesthood, He did speak of the termination of the temple and its services (Matthew 23:37–39; 24:1–2; John 4:21); but He said nothing similar about the Sabbath or the Decalogue. On the contrary, He plainly said that He did not come to abolish the law (Matthew 5:17), declaring that “whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (verse 19).
Obviously, Jesus recognized the distinction between the moral law (the Ten Commandments) and the ceremonial law. In His “Sermon on the Mount,” He cites several laws from the Old Testament and brings to light their true meaning. As noted earlier, Jesus takes issue, not with the law, but with erroneous interpretations of the law.

Through His personal example, He also underscored the true meaning of the Sabbath day. He ignored the unscriptural traditions the scribes and Pharisees had tacked to the Sabbath; and, in so doing, He brought to light the Sabbath’s meaning as a day picturing liberation from bondage. In short, He restored the original meaning and purpose of the Sabbath day.

In Deuteronomy 5:14–15, Moses links the Sabbath rest with Israel’s liberation from bondage in Egypt, thus showing that the Sabbath is a day picturing redemption and liberation. Similarly, Jesus—the “Prophet like Moses”—performed numerous healings on the Sabbath, linking the day to liberation and demonstrating His power to forgive sins. (See Matthew 12:10–13; Luke 13:10–17; 14:1–6; John 5:5–13; 7:21–24; 9:1–34.)

In each of these instances, the Pharisees accused Jesus of breaking the Sabbath. It was the Pharisees, not Jesus, who abused the Sabbath. Through their erroneous traditions, they had made the Sabbath burdensome. Jesus’ actions were in complete accord with the intent and purpose of the Sabbath. He pointed out that “it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath” (Mathew 12:12), and informed His accusers that the “Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27), meaning that it was to be a delight (Isaiah 58:13), not a burden.

On one occasion, Jesus’ disciples plucked heads of grain and began to eat as they passed through a grainfield on the Sabbath. The Pharisees accused them of breaking the Sabbath (Matthew 12:1–2). Of course, there is nothing wrong with satisfying hunger on the Sabbath. Plucking a few heads of grain and eating is hardly the kind of “work” the Fourth Commandment forbids. Jesus refuted the Pharisees’ accusation by citing the example of David, who violated a ceremonial law in a time of need and was excused, and by pointing out that the priests perform temple duties on the Sabbath but are guiltless (verses 3–6).

Jesus used this occasion to show that the One who permitted the disciples to pluck heads of grain and eat on the Sabbath is greater than the temple (verse 6). The Pharisees must have been stunned when He declared, “For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath” (verse 8). In making this statement, He was affirming His Messiahship and declaring His dominion over creation and redemption, both of which are pictured in the Sabbath day.

Far from abolishing the Sabbath, Jesus confirmed it, declaring His lordship over it, and restoring its true meaning and intent.

The Sabbath and the Early Church

The earliest Christians observed the Sabbath and the annual festivals. The New Testament church was born on the Day of Pentecost, an annual holy day (Acts 2; cf. Leviticus 23:4–7, 15–16). The coming of the Holy Spirit at that time gave new meaning to the day, just as Christ’s death at the time of the Passover sacrifice gave new meaning to the Passover festival. No doubt, the New Covenant community—entirely Jewish at first—came to recognize the Christological and New Covenant significance of all the festivals and holy days, including the weekly Sabbath.

The writer of the book of Hebrews would later link the seventh day of creation (Hebrews 4:4; cf. Genesis 2:2) with the “Sabbath rest” awaiting the people of God in the future (Hebrews 4:9), showing that the Sabbath continues its function as a shadow of future realities. The Sabbath, then, is much more than a Covenant sign for Israel. It symbolizes the eschatological “rest” promised to the New Covenant community. The shadow and the reality have not yet merged, so the Sabbath has not been abolished.

The apostle Paul observed the Sabbath (Acts 13:14; 16:13; 17:2; 18:4). The thousands of Jewish believers at Jerusalem were “zealous for the law” (Acts 21:20). They were Sabbath-keepers. James, writing to “the twelve tribes in the Dispersion” (James 1:1), identified as Christians (James 2:1), mentions “your assembly” (verse 2). Stern writes, “The word [assembly] in Greek is ‘sunagoge’; it appears 57 times in the New Testament. Fifty-six times it refers to a Jewish place of congregational assembly and is translated ‘synagogue’ in virtually all English versions” (David Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary, p. 728). James’ use of the term suggests the “twelve tribes” to whom the epistle was addressed observed the Sabbath.

Some cite Colossians 2:16–17 as proof that the Sabbath was abolished. But the passage does not say that at all. Paul writes, “Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.” The false teachers insisted on “asceticism and worship of angels” (verse 18), with “regulations—‘Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch’ (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings” (verses 20–22). They were passing judgment on the Colossian believers for the manner in which the believers were keeping the Sabbath and festivals. The false teachers insisted on observance of the Sabbath and festivals according to their man-made “regulations.” Paul reminds the Colossians that the Sabbath and festivals are a “shadow” of which Christ is the “substance.”

The “days and months and seasons and years” the Galatian believers were observing (Galatians 4:10) were probably related to Jewish astrological beliefs. These were the “weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more” (verse 9). Paul would not have described simple Sabbath observance in such a way.
In Romans 14, Paul says, “One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord” (verses 5–6). This probably refers to days set aside for fasting—perhaps the well-known fasts and partial fasts traditionally observed by the Jews. (Rome had a large Jewish population, and the churches of Rome were made up of Jews and Gentiles.) The Sabbath is a time for community worship; this text speaks of observing days as a matter of personal devotion. Paul was not opposed to traditions that did not conflict with God’s law. He simply didn’t want members of the New Covenant community judging each other over such matter.

The New Covenant community is made up of “those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus” (Revelation 12:17). The commandments of God include the Fourth Commandment: “Remember the Sabbath, to keep it holy.”

The Fifth Commandment

Honor your father and your mother (Exodus 20:12; Deuteronomy 5:16).

The Fifth Commandment is accompanied by a promise: “…that your days may be long in the land the LORD your God is giving you” (Exodus 20:12). Proper respect for legitimate authority is essential to orderly society, and it begins in the home. Children who grow to maturity in a happy family environment are more likely to become productive members of society than those who grow up in an environment filled with anger, resentment, hatred, and disrespect.

The Fifth Commandment calls for children (and adults) to honor their parents, but it also calls on parents to conduct themselves honorably. Respectable, law-abiding parents are more likely to produce law-abiding children, and parents who live lawlessly are more likely to produce lawless children. Righteousness begets righteousness. Iniquity begets iniquity.

The warning accompanying the Second Commandment refers to the pattern of iniquity begetting iniquity. “…I am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments” (Exodus 20:5–6).

Some have supposed that the curse brought on by sinful fathers is automatically passed on to the children regardless the behavior of the children. This is clearly not so. Notice that the curse is passed on to the third and fourth generation of those who hate God. If the children turn from the iniquity of the fathers and choose to love God and keep His commandments, they will reap the benefits of God’s steadfast love. Unfortunately, this is often not the case.

The pattern of iniquity begetting iniquity is seen again and again in Israel’s history. Wicked kings often produced wicked heirs. The terrible consequences of wickedness were felt until the pattern was broken. Unfortunately, the influence of righteous kings was usually short-lived. The people of Israel always returned to the sins of their fathers. They rejected the authority of their true Father (Deuteronomy 14:1; 1 Chronicles 29:10; Isaiah 1:2; 63:16; 64:8; Jeremiah 3:19; Hosea 1:10; 11:1) and for this reason failed to reap the blessing of the promise attached to the Fifth Commandment: “…that your days may be long in the land the LORD your God is giving you.”

Honoring parents does not mean following their ungodly ways. It means rather respecting them as parents and recognizing the legitimacy of their parental authority. But parents have no legitimate authority to teach their children to disobey God, from whom all legitimate authority ultimately arises. In fact, a person may honor his parents through refusing to follow them in ungodly behavior. In so doing, he is honoring his spiritual Father and setting a proper example for his parents and other members of his family.

Crucial to Israel’s National Well-Being

Obedience to the Fifth Commandment was crucial to Israel’s survival as a nation. The importance of this commandment is seen in the penalty for striking or cursing one’s parents. Anyone who “strikes” or “curses his father or his mother shall be put to death” (Exodus 21:15, 17). This warning is reinforced in Deuteronomy 21:18–21:

If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of the city, “This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from you midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

This is not speaking of the child who occasionally has a “temper tantrum” or displays stubbornness from time to time. Rather, it speaks of a long-standing pattern of sinful behavior and rebellion. If the people of Israel were to reap the blessings of obedience to the Covenant, then they had to keep God’s commandments from generation to generation. This would be impossible if rebellion were allowed to persist and if honor and respect were not learned and practiced in the home.

God expected parents to teach His commandments to their children (Deuteronomy 6:7; 11:19; 32:46) and tell them of the wonderful works He did for the people of Israel when He delivered them from Egypt (Exodus 12:26–27; 13:8, 14–15; Deuteronomy 4:9–10). Such teaching is reinforced in an environment of love and respect, where disciplinary measures are guided by love, not anger. The family unit is the foundation of a stable society, and the Fifth Commandment is essential to family stability.

Had the people of Israel diligently adhered to the Fifth Commandment and all it entails, they would not have turned to idolatry and other sins that resulted in their expulsion from the Promised Land.

Repeated in the New Testament

The apostle Paul urged the youth of the church in Ephesus to obey the Fifth Commandment.

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. “Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), “that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land.” Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Ephesians 6:1–4).

As noted previously, the promise accompanying this commandment originally specified the Promised Land—“the land the LORD your God is giving you.” But Paul, by applying the commandment to Gentile converts far away from the Promised Land, shows he recognizes the universality of the Fifth Commandment. He also sees the connection between loving parental guidance and the children’s responsibility to honor and obey their parents.

Honoring one’s parents means more than obeying and respecting them during one’s youth. It also means expressing love for them in their latter years, whether through financial or other forms of help or simply being there for them and taking time out to show appreciation for them.

The Jews of the time of Jesus recognized this responsibility toward parents, but the Pharisees had a tradition that permitted a person to sidestep this obligation. The tradition permitted a person to vow to reserve his possessions as a gift of God, which released him from the obligation to use his possessions to help his aging parents. Jesus sternly rebuked them, calling them “hypocrites” and charging them with leaving the “commandment of God” in favor of the “tradition of men” (Mark 7:6, 8).

And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ But you say, ‘If a man tells his father or his mother, Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban’ (that is, given to God)—then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother, thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do” (Mark 7:9–13).

Jesus clearly upheld the Fifth Commandment as a “commandment of God” and part of the “word of God.” His strong condemnation of rejecting this commandment in favor of a man-made tradition connotes the timeless nature of the commandments of the Decalogue. Just as it was a sin to dishonor one’s parents in the time of Jesus, it’s a sin to dishonor one’s parents today.

A Commandment For Our Time

Our world would be vastly different if every child learned to honor his or her parents and if every parent sought to instill godly principles in his or her children. Respect for legitimate authority and the rule of law would go up, and the soaring crime rate that plagues our cities would dramatically drop.

The Fifth Commandment is the first of the Ten Commandments that deals directly with human relationships. Children who are taught to esteem their parents are better equipped to learn to love and honor the Father of humankind and develop wholesome relationships with other human beings. They learn a proper respect for human life, for the property, privileges, and rights of others.

The book of Proverbs is filled with helpful advice for parents and children. A father who loves his son “is diligent to discipline him” (Proverbs 13:24; cf. 19:18; 23:13–14; 29:15, 17). “A wise son makes a glad father” and “hears his father’s instruction” (Proverbs 10:1; 13:1). The “father’s instruction” and “mother’s teaching” are a “graceful garland” for a son’s head and “pendants” for his neck (Proverbs 1:8–9), strengthening him against the enticements of the wicked.

The path of wisdom is the path established by God’s holy law. The best time to begin the journey along that path is in childhood, with the help of loving, God-fearing parents. “Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6).

The Sixth Commandment

You shall not murder (Exodus 20:13; Deuteronomy 5:17).

From the early days of human history, when Cain killed his brother Abel (Genesis 4:8), murder has been a sad reality of human societies. Murder statistics in the United States alone are astronomical. We read of homicides every day in our newspapers and hear of them on televised news reports. Of all the crimes one human being could perpetrate against another, murder tops the list. For this reason, it is the first “You shall not” commandment of the part of the Decalogue pertaining to loving one’s neighbor as one’s self.

Like the first four commandments (which pertain to man’s relationship to God), the last six (which deal with man’s relationships with man) are presented in a logical order. The Fifth Commandment is foundational to human relationships, for the family unit is basic to the health of human societies. The next four commandments forbid, in descending order, the worst acts a person can commit against his neighbor: murder, adultery, theft, bearing false witness. The last commandment—“You shall not covet…”—goes to the root of the problem of human sinfulness. Covetousness is an internal matter—the desire for something that cannot be lawfully obtained—and leads to the sinful acts condemned by the commandments preceding the last one.

Murder is a major problem in the United States and throughout the world. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the homicide rate nearly doubled from the mid 1960s to the late 1970s and peaked at 10.2 per 100,000 population in 1980. The rate fell to 8.0 per 100,000 in 1984. It rose again in the late 1980s and early 1990s, peaking in 1991 at 9.8 per 100,000, but sharply declining between 1992 and 2,000. Since then, the rate has remained stable, but homicide remains a serious problem in the United States.

And then there are the terrorists, murderous dictators, and cruel regimes that have demonstrated little regard for human life. As in ancient times, murder is a grisly reality in today’s world.

Respect for Life

The Sixth Commandment forbids murder. On the positive side, the Sixth Commandment is a directive to respect human life. It stands in bold opposition to the philosophy embraced by what some have called the “culture of death,” which insists that euthanasia and abortion are “rights.” Opponents of these so-called rights are often called “right-wing extremists” whose fanaticism drives them to impose their religious views on others. Yet, politics and religion aside, it should not be difficult for anyone to see that a society’s health is directly related to its regard or disregard for the sanctity of human life, and to exclude the unborn from the right of life is to exclude the most innocent of the innocent.
Abortion is legal in fifty-six countries and illegal in ninety-seven countries. Some 126,000 abortions are conducted (legally and illegally) every day, totaling approximately 46 million per year. An estimated 1,370,000 abortions occur annually in the United States.

Some argue that there is no biblical law against abortion or nothing in Israel’s criminal code forbidding it. This argument overlooks the fact that, in Israel, children were seen as a gift from God. Human beings bear the image and likeness of God, and the unborn were not excluded from “human being” status. So the absence of a specific injunction against abortion was not needed; such an act would have been considered the taking of innocent human life and would have been viewed as a criminal act.

Further, there is evidence in the Mosaic legal code that killing a fetus was viewed as a serious matter.

When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out [prematurely], but there is no harm [to the mother or the child, or children], the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if there is harm [to mother or child], then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe (Exodus 21:22–25).

The word translated “children” here is the word usually used for “child.” The penalty imposed is to be proportionate to the damages. If the woman or the prematurely born child is injured or dies, the penalty is to be administered in proportion to the loss. If the child emerges prematurely and dies (or emerges dead), the striker is guilty of culpable negligence resulting in death and is to be punished accordingly. This shows that the penalty for killing an unborn baby and a born baby was the same—so, in Israel, a fetus was viewed as a human being.

Abortion is a violation of the Sixth Commandment. (It is beyond the scope of this booklet to address arguments about exceptional cases, such as the extremely rare instance when a woman’s life is at stake, or in a case involving rape.) The underlying problem with the “abortion on demand” argument is a lack of respect for life, particularly the life of the unborn.

The Spirit of Murder

John says it plainly: “Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him” (1 John 3:15). John is speaking of the spirit of murder. If there were no hatred, there would be no intentional homicide. The Sixth Commandment, then, pertains as much to the intentions of the heart as to the acts resulting from those intentions.

John’s equating hatred with murder accords with the teaching of Jesus: “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander” (Matthew 15:19).

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says, “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire” (Matthew 5:21–22).

The “anger” Jesus speaks of here is not righteous indignation or the momentary feeling of outrage one may experience after being wronged; it is anger stemming from hatred. Jesus Himself must have been indignant when He condemned the hypocritical practices of the scribes and Pharisees, calling the religious leaders “hypocrites,” “blind guides,” “blind fools,” “serpents,” and a “brood of vipers” who make a proselyte “twice as much a child of hell” as themselves (Matthew 23). Paul cautions, “Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger, and give no opportunity to the devil” (Ephesians 4:26–27). So Jesus does not condemn all expressions of anger. His “But I say to you” exposition in Matthew 5:22 pertains to anger motivated by hateful spite—the spirit of murder.

Murder and the hatred that motivates this horrendous crime are condemned throughout Scripture. In the end, all murderers will have their part “in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8).
The Sixth Commandment—“You shall not murder”—was in force in the beginning of human history. It remains in full force today.

The Seventh Commandment

You shall not commit adultery (Exodus 20:14; Deuteronomy 5:18).

According to statistics compiled by the Associated Press, 22 percent of men and 14 percent of women have admitted having at least one extramarital affair at some time in the past. Since adulterers are rarely truthful, one wonders how many questioned in surveys on infidelity actually told the truth.

The “success” of the pornography industry—with Internet porn, “adult” book and video stores, and other markets available to smut peddlers—reflects the moral decay of modern societies. According to an online survey of 38,000 Internet users, one in ten admitted being addicted to sex and the Internet. No doubt, the easily accessible and widely available pornographic materials have stimulated the depraved appetites of rapists and sexual predators.

The “Sexual Revolution” of the 1960s opened the door to a variety of immoral behaviors, including infidelity, premarital sex, and homosexuality and other forms of perversity. The new sexual “freedom” brought with it a rash of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), some previously unknown and some incurable, and a lower view of the sanctity of marriage and traditional family values.

Today, many view sex outside marriage as a normal and healthy expression. Advocates of “safe sex” through the use of condoms have encouraged promiscuity and the changing attitudes toward cohabitation and premarital sexual relations. For many, the idea that sex should be reserved for marriage and that abstinence is the solution to the STD problem is “prudish,” a long-outdated notion stemming from our Puritanical past and pushed by the fanatical “religious right.”

Nevertheless, the views of the many or the few cannot change the fact that the traditional family unit is the backbone of a healthy society. Moral degeneracy can only weaken the backbone and result in societal decay.

God, not man, established the institution of marriage! He intended that marriage be between one man and one woman, a covenant that remains binding as long as both partners draw breath. No matter what advocacy groups say, God says, “You shall not commit adultery!”

As noted previously in this booklet, the commandments of the Decalogue are ten broad moral categories. The Seventh Commandment specifically forbids adultery, or extramarital sex, but as a moral category it forbids a broad range of sexual misconduct, including fornication (sex outside marriage), homosexual activity, bestiality, and incest (see Leviticus 18).

In ancient Israel, the penalty for infidelity was severe. “If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death” (Leviticus 20:10).

New Testament Admonitions

Paul urges, “Flee from sexual immorality” (I Corinthians 6:18). Citing Israel’s unfaithfulness as a warning for Christians, he writes, “We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day” (10:8). He lists “sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality” among the “works of the flesh” (Galatians 5:19), sternly warning that “those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God” (verse 21).

Peter warns of following the false teachers who “have eyes full of adultery, insatiable for sin” (2 Peter 2:14). For those who return to such defilements after escaping them through the knowledge of Christ, Peter says, “the last state has become worse for them than the first” (verse 20).

Adultery is not against the law in many countries, but it is a direct and very serious violation of God’s law. In the final judgment, the “sexually immoral” will be among those whose “portion will be in the lake of fire and sulfur, which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8).

But there is hope for all sinners. The key is repentance. God will forgive the sinner who turns to Him in wholehearted repentance, which is not merely temporary remorse arising from self-pity, but is a change of mind—a resolve to submit to God on His terms. It means a commitment to put away evil thoughts as soon as they arise. It means avoiding anything that might lead to temptation, including movies with sexual content, all forms of pornography, and “singles” bars or other places where temptation is likely to occur. As Paul says, “Flee from sexual immorality!”

A Matter of the Heart

Immoral acts are the end result of immoral thoughts. Jesus speaks of adultery of the heart (or mind), and offers a radical solution:

You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell [Gehenna, the “Valley of Hinnom,” a garbage dump outside Jerusalem where fires burned continually—a symbol of the final judgment of the wicked]. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell [Gehenna]” (Matthew 5:27–30).

Of course, a person’s eyes and hands do not cause him to sin, so Jesus is not recommending self-mutilation. The “hand” and the “eye” symbolize actions and intents. Jesus simply means that a person’s intent to commit adultery is adultery. A Christian must “cut off” or “tear out” adulterous intents and all actions associated with them.

“Lust” is the desire for that which cannot be lawfully obtained. To desire sexual relations with another person’s spouse is lust; it is adultery of the heart. “But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death” (James 1:14–15).

Christians must make every effort to “abstain from the passions of the flesh” (1 Peter 2:11), taking “every thought captive to obey Christ” (2 Corinthians 10:5), “plucking out” and “cutting off” every impulse, thought, action, attitude, and desire that would lead to sin.

The Eighth Commandment

You shall not steal (Exodus 20:15; Deuteronomy 5:19).

Theft is a day-to-day reality throughout the world. Probably, each person reading these words has had something stolen from him at least once in his lifetime. And most have probably stolen something at one time or another.

We lock our cars when we leave them unattended. We lock the doors and windows of our homes, install burglar alarms, and join neighborhood crime-prevention groups to prevent thieves from helping themselves to our belongings.

Theft comes in many forms and occurs at every level of society. It occurs in large corporations and in small communities—and everywhere in between. A thief is a thief, whether he is rich or poor, and all thieves, to a greater or lesser extent, disregard the rights and property of others. A person who steals from his neighbor does not love his neighbor.

Like other sins identified by the Ten Commandments, theft arises from the sinful condition of the heart. “For out of the heart,” says Jesus, “come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander” (Matthew 15:19). And, generally, a thief is not just a thief. His lack of moral character usually gives rise to other sins, such as adultery, bearing false witness, and slander.

The Positive Side of the Commandment

The Eighth Commandment presupposes the right to own property. Any social structure that precludes the right to own property undercuts a basic principle contained within the broad parameters of this commandment. Communism is among the worst offenders in this regard.

The commandment also underscores the virtue of the work ethic, which is a part of the apostolic tradition (2 Thessalonians 3:6–9). “If anyone is not willing to work,” Paul says, “let him not eat” (verse 10). Here, Paul is urging able-bodied believers to work for a living so as not to be a burden on others.

The opposite of taking is giving. The Eighth Commandment, on the positive side, brings to light the responsibility to help those in need. As Paul says, “Let the thief no longer steal, but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he may have something to share with anyone in need” (Ephesians 4:28). A timeless maxim comes to mind: “Whoever has a bountiful eye will be blessed, for he shares his bread with the poor” (Proverbs 22:9).

The Bible—Old Testament and New—abounds with exhortations on helping the poor. “For there will never cease to be poor in the land,” Moses said to his fellow Israelites. “Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land’” (Deuteronomy 15:11). Give freely, not grudgingly, Moses said, adding that “for this the LORD your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you undertake” (verse 10).
Paul points out that “whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. Each one must give as he has made up his mind, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver” (2 Corinthians 9:6–7).

Consequences of Stealing

A thief, because of his self-serving disposition, can never be truly content with life. The act of stealing may bring momentary excitement due to a rush of adrenalin, but the things he steals never satisfy his deepest needs. The thief generally lives with a certain fear of getting caught, and he knows the penalty for stealing can be quite stiff.

In ancient Israel, a thief caught with a stolen ox, donkey, or sheep had to repay two animals per stolen animal (Exodus 22:4). If, however, the thief killed or sold a stolen ox or sheep, the fine was five oxen per ox or four sheep per sheep (verse 1).

Ultimately, the consequences of unrepented theft are much more severe. “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?” asks Paul. “Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, or idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9–10).

The Ninth Commandment

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor (Exodus 20:16; Deuteronomy 5:20).

In ancient Israel’s judicial system, a conviction for a crime was to be based on the evidence provided by two or three witnesses (Deuteronomy 19:15). The problem was that an innocent person could be falsely charged and consequently punished on the basis of false testimony. The Ninth Commandment addresses this concern. To curtail the likelihood of false testimony, a person found guilty of testifying falsely was to receive the same punishment the person he falsely accused would have received (verses 16–21).

The first of the numerical sayings in the book of Proverbs lists “six things that the LORD hates, seven that are an abomination to him” (Proverbs 6:16). These include “haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers” (verses 17–19). Notice how many of these things relate directly to the sin identified by the Ninth Commandment.

While the Ninth Commandment directly forbids false accusations, the broad general principle forbids all falsehood and dishonesty. We see dishonesty in advertising, in politics, and even in religion. Since time immemorial, whole social structures have been built on foundations of legitimate hopes mingled with lies.

Truthfulness and Godliness

Truthfulness is absolutely essential to godliness. All relationships, if they are to maximize the value due to each person involved, must be founded on truthfulness. Human beings bear the image of God and are entitled to the truth. A liar, therefore, disregards the dignity of others. Put another way, lying is dehumanizing. It is spiritually and psychologically harmful to the one telling the lie, and reflects a lack of proper respect to the one to whom the lie is told.

Scripture emphatically condemns lying as a serious sin with serious consequences. The law, says Paul, is laid down “for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine” (1 Timothy 1:9–10). In latter times, “some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared” (1 Timothy 4:1–2). Ultimately, “murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars” will be destroyed in a lake of fire, “which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8).

Satan the devil “has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies” (John 8:44). His servants—masters of deception—“disguise themselves as servants of righteousness” (2 Corinthians 11:15).

Lying, when compared with murder, adultery, or theft, may seem benign—a relatively slight character flaw. Often, however, lying stems from a much more serious character defect than we might imagine.

In his book, People of the Lie, Dr. M. Scott Peck observes, “We lie only when we are attempting to cover up something we know to be illicit. Some rudimentary form of conscience must precede the act of lying. There is no need to hide unless we first feel that something needs to be hidden.” Peck further explains, “We become evil by attempting to hide from ourselves. The wickedness of the evil is not committed directly, but indirectly as a part of this cover-up process. Evil originates not in the absence of guilt [as in the psychopath] but in the effort to escape it” (p. 76).

Painful Confession

Those Peck describes as “the evil” often lie, both in word and deed, in order to create an image pleasing to others and then see themselves the way others see them, thus creating and adopting a phony self-image. They are, in effect, lying to themselves. This, of course, prevents genuine repentance, which is a prerequisite to true conversion and godly living.

When God forced David to come to terms with the enormity of his sins (2 Samuel 11–12:13), David stopped lying to himself, stopped his effort to escape his guilt. The depth of his repentance is seen in Psalm 51:

Have mercy on me, O God, according to your steadfast love; according to your abundant mercy blot out my transgressions. Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin! For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me. Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment. Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. Behold, you delight in truth in the inward being, and you teach me wisdom in the secret heart. Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow. Let me hear joy and gladness; let the bones that you have broken rejoice. Hide your face from my sins, and blot out all my iniquities. Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from your presence, and take not your Holy Spirit from me. Restore to me the joy of your salvation, and uphold me with a willing spirit. Then I will teach transgressors your ways, and sinners will return to you. Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, O God of my salvation, and my tongue will sing aloud of your righteousness. O Lord, open my lips, and my mouth will declare your praise. For you will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it; you will not be pleased with a burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise. Do good to Zion in your good pleasure; build up the walls of Jerusalem; then will you delight in right sacrifices, in burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings; then bulls will be offered on your altar.

Repentance—true, godly repentance—requires “truth in the inward being.” This means no more cover-ups, no more pretense, no more mental games and false self-images. It means openhearted—and often painful—confession of sins, all sins, not just the “minor flaws” that allow us to continue lying to ourselves and deceiving others. It means honestly looking into the darkened recesses of our own hearts and minds and, no matter how painful, laying our hearts bare before God, confessing the true nature of our own motives, admitting our “secret” sins, and resolving to put an end to all lying, both to ourselves and to others.

The Tenth Commandment

You shall not covet…anything that is your neighbor’s (Exodus 20:17; Deuteronomy 5:21).

The word “covet” may be simply defined as the desire to have something. But the Tenth Commandment speaks of an inordinate or excessive desire, or desire for something that cannot be lawfully obtained. This commandment differs from the previous commandments in that it pertains specifically to the heart. It goes directly to the underlying cause of external acts of sin, so it is intimately connected with all the preceding commandments.

The physical act of adultery is a direct violation of God’s law, but Jesus tells us adultery is also a matter of the heart. “I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). The same is true of murder (verses 21–22). The physical acts of murder and adultery are preceded by an unlawful desire.

The first human act of covetousness occurred in the Garden of Eden. Adam and Eve had full permission to eat fruit from any of the trees of the garden except one, the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Genesis 2:16–17). Yet, under the deceptive influence of the “snake” (Satan), Eve “saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate” (Genesis 3:6).

Certainly there is nothing wrong with the normal human desire to satisfy hunger and enjoy the good taste of food. The problem with Adam and Eve was not desire, per se; it was misdirected desire, which is covetousness, or lust. They engaged in an act God had forthrightly forbidden. They permitted their misdirected desire to overwhelm their sense of right and wrong; thus, sin entered the world of humankind.

The forbidden fruit was appealing to the senses. It looked good (“a delight to the eyes”), undoubtedly tasted good (“was good for food”), and was seen as a means of obtaining wisdom (“was to be desired to make one wise”). These are precisely the things John identifies as basic components of the post-Eden world:

Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions—is not from the Father but is from the world. And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever (1 John 2:15–17).

Inordinate and unlawful desires—covetousness, lust—are at the root of every deliberate sin, every wanton act of violence, every act of idolatry, adultery, and theft. Every deliberate act of sin involves some form of covetousness. Even pride itself is a form of covetousness; it is nothing more than the inordinate desire for possessions, power, or prestige.

God’s Word tells us “the treacherous are taken captive by their lust” (Proverbs 11:6). God ordered the Israelites to burn the carved images of their vanquished enemies and to avoid coveting or taking the silver and gold on the idols—“lest you be ensnared by it” (Deuteronomy 7:25).

There is nothing wrong with acquiring possessions, increasing wealth, or laying up for the future. In fact, Scripture reveals these are worthwhile goals. They are a problem only when one’s priorities are out of order. Jesus urges, “Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Luke 12:15). Putting God first through striving to obey His commandments and rely on His promises gives meaning to life and direction to one’s desires.

Covetousness—the Root of Evil

Inordinate and unlawful desires lie behind all sinful actions. Perhaps this is why Paul’s discussion on the law, sin, and Christian responsibility focuses on the Tenth Commandment.

Had it not been for knowledge of the law, Paul says, “I would not have known sin. I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, ‘You shall not covet.’ But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness” (Romans 7:7–8).

While sin may be defined simply as the transgression of the law (see 1 John 3:4), here the word “sin” refers to the disposition or inclination that motivates transgressions. The inner “sin” that leads to transgressions, or acts of sin, is covetousness. The self-serving carnal nature revolts against the Tenth Commandment by becoming even more covetous.

The process that ultimately leads to eternal death begins with unrestrained desire. James says, “God…tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death” (James 1:13–15).

History provides examples of political leaders who began their careers with the motive of bringing needed changes to their societies but, unfortunately, became dictators once they were under the corrupting influence of power—or, more accurately, once they permitted their desire to hold or increase their sphere of power to corrupt them. The same is true of some religious leaders. The ancient Hasidim, for example, arose from the need to keep the Jewish people mindful of their heritage and of the painful consequences of falling under the influence of pagan nations. Unfortunately, the well-intentioned Hasidim, once they assumed power in Jewish religious affairs, permitted their desire to maintain their prestige and sphere of influence to corrupt them. By the time of Jesus, they were known as scribes and Pharisees.
It is often said that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Wealth, sex, and fame are also said to have a corrupting effect. Actually, this is not true. None of these things, of themselves, are corrupting. Corruption results only when an inordinate or unlawful desire is involved.

God is all-powerful, but He is perfectly righteous, so power is not the problem. He owns the cosmos and gives power to gain wealth, so wealth is not the problem. He created human sexuality and declare it “very good,” so sex is not the problem. He has put men in high positions, giving them popularity and fame, so fame is not the problem.
The problem is unrestrained and misdirected desire, or covetousness. Only when covetousness enters the picture do power, wealth, sex, and fame become a problem.

Conquering Covetousness

Overcoming covetousness may prove to be difficult, but with God’s help it can be done. There are several steps you can take to bring your desires under control.

First, confess the sin of covetousness. To overcome any problem, a person has to admit that he has the problem. It’s easy to enter into denial and redefine our motives; it may be tough to honestly admit our innermost motives and desires. But anyone serious about following Christ must do it. Truthful confession is the key to genuine repentance.
Second, ask for God’s help. Ask every morning upon arising. Ask each time a wrong desire begins to arise. Ask before retiring each evening. Remember, “Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you” (Matthew 7:7).

Third, avoid evil influences as much as possible. This may mean staying away from certain clubs, limiting social involvement with certain people, or resolving to avoid certain types of entertainment.
(If you haven’t read them, please write immediately for your free copies of How YOU Can Be An OVERCOMER and Ten Facts You Should Know About Repentance.)

Conclusion

The moral categories set forth in the Ten Commandments are foundational to the health and well being of a society. They reflect the holy character of God Himself and are an everlasting code of moral law designed to serve human beings, who bear the image of their Creator. It is indeed unfortunate that some, misguided in their interpretation of a few difficult passages of Scripture, have concluded that the Decalogue was set aside with the advent of the New Covenant.

Far from being a curse that was nailed to the cross of Christ, the Decalogue is a precious gift God has given to all mankind. Christ, the model of perfection, kept God’s commandments and instructed His followers to do the same. The law went forth from Jerusalem to the nations through the teachings of the apostles and early disciples and has since made its way into the hands of millions around the world. This would not have happened had it not been for Christ and the commission He gave to His followers.

By no means are we suggesting that one can earn salvation through keeping the Ten Commandments. The law identifies the problem; it does not “fix” it. It exposes sin but does not remove it. It reveals the right path, but does not enable us to walk it. Remission of sins and spiritual regeneration are gifts made possible by the redemptive work of Christ. The law simply informs us of our need for a Savior.

Yet the righteous standards set forth in God’s law are timeless. For the redeemed, they are light to the path of life and reminder of what the blood of Christ is all about.

The Psalmist says it best:

Oh how I love your law! It is my meditation all the day. Your commandment makes me wiser than my enemies, for it is ever with me. I have more understanding than all my teachers, for your testimonies are my meditation. I understand more than the aged, for I keep your precepts…. How sweet are your words to my taste, sweeter than honey to my mouth! Through your precepts I get understanding…. Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (Psalm 119:97–100, 103–105).