Bible Commentaries
Galatians 2

Verses 1-2

THE COUNCIL OF JERUSALEM

Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. Galatians 2:1

The fourteen-year period mentioned here presents us with some difficult problems as we have said. Some think we must take Paul's statement literally since in 1:20 it seems that he all but swears before God that he is telling the truth about his visits to Jerusalem. For instance, the scholar, Y.K. Fung, remarks that Paul is certainly dealing with precise chronology because the exactness is germane to his whole argument.^(F1)

On the other hand, when we try to squeeze the early and busy life of Paul into a mere fourteen year span we run into great conflicts, and making chronological sense seems to be almost impossible. A big problem is the relief trip to Jerusalem conducted by Paul and Barnabas in Acts 11:29-30. That trip had to come in close proximity to the famine which we now know occurred in the years AD 46-47. Famine relief seems to be spoken of as an urgent and immediate matter in the Acts passage, so we might properly assume that the relief mission took place early in AD 46. If Paul is holding to a strict fourteen- year period between his first and second visits to Jerusalem, then the chronology is unworkable.

The Council of Jerusalem no doubt happened after Paul's First Missionary Journey (AD 46-47) and before his Second Missionary Journey (AD 49-52). It seems natural that this is the council that is spoken of here in Galatians 2. The date many give for the important council is about AD 49. If we count backwards fourteen years from this conference to Paul's first visit after his conversion, that visit would have had to take place around AD 35. Such a chronology is at least workable.

However, if we count back fourteen years from his relief visit to Jerusalem in AD 46, and indeed if we factor in the three years that Paul was in the wilderness, we end up with Paul getting converted before Jesus died in AD 30. That would have been impossible. So we must understand that Paul is not giving us a strict fourteen-year period wherein everything had to happen. If the relief visit happened anywhere close to the famine of AD 46-47 we can see how that visit could not be considered as a time for the Jerusalem Council which some have proposed.

Perhaps Paul in Galatians 1:20 is not swearing that everything happened in fourteen years but is swearing that he didn't spend time with Peter and James in order to get his gospel all formulated and to get their approval.

If we allow the passage to fall into place naturally, it is likely that Paul was converted somewhere around 33-35 as many chronologies insist. This would allow the events in Antioch to all fit into place. It would even allow a relief visit of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem sometime close to the famine of AD 46-47.

There are still some problems to be worked out. For instance, Paul speaks of setting the gospel he preached privately before the leaders in Jerusalem, whereas in the Acts account it seems to be an open meeting.^(F2) The other problem is the presence of Titus. The fact that Acts does not mention Titus is not a real problem though since the writer Luke does not mention Titus in any part of his history.^(F3)

Many wonder why the decree is not mentioned specifically here in Galatians 2, since its decision seemingly would have been a clincher in Paul's debate. The Scottish divine, Robert Jamieson, remarks about this saying, "Because his design here is to show the Galatians his own independent apostolic authority, whence he was not likely to support himself by their decision."^{Acts 20." Guzik on verse 1 differs saying, "This trip to Jerusalem is most likely the one mentioned in Acts 11:27-30."">(F4)}

It might help us if we try to get Paul's time-frame in mind a little better. Let us insert here what could be a possible chronology for this early period in Christian history.

AD 33 Saul of Tarsus converted – (Acts 9:1-30).

33-35 Paul in Damascus and in the Arabian wilderness (Galatians 1:15-17).

Note: the three years mentioned could have been only parts of three years.

35 Paul visits Jerusalem and sees Peter & James (Galatians 1:18-20).

35 Paul is sent off to Cilicia and to Tarsus his home city (Acts 9:29-30).

37-54 Reign of Emperor Claudius (the great famine happened in his reign).

40s Barnabas is sent by the Jerusalem church to work in Antioch (Acts 11:22ff).

44-45 Paul's full year in Antioch of Syria working with Barnabas (Acts 11:25-26).

44-45? The prophet Agabus visits Antioch and prophesies a famine (Acts 11:28).

46-47 The great famine predicted by Agabus occurs according to historical records.

46 Paul & Barnabas take aid to Jerusalem and return to Antioch (Acts 11:29-30; 12:25).

46-47 First Missionary Journey from Antioch with Barnabas (Acts 13:1ff).

47 Paul and Barnabas return to Antioch and stay a long time (Acts 14:26-28).

48-49 Judean Judaizers come down to trouble the Antioch Christians (Acts 15:1) .

Note: They were no doubt also troubling the new Galatian converts at this time.

48-49 Disputes occur over the subject of circumcision and keeping the law (Acts 15:1-2).

48-49? Peter visits Antioch and Paul has a confrontation with him (Galatians 2:11ff.).

49 Paul, Barnabas and Titus go up to Jerusalem – The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15).

49 Paul, Barnabas, Barsabbas, Silas with other brothers all go down to Antioch (Acts 15:22ff)

49? Galatians is written.

49-52 Second Missionary Journey – Paul and Silas.

Note: Paul may have taken Silas instead of Barnabas partly because of the latter's stand in regard to not eating with Gentiles.

It seems that the bane of Paul's ministry had to do with the many false teachers who followed him around and crept into the congregations he established. The Anglican clergyman John Stott says that they were not so much "robbing Peter to pay Paul" but were exalting Peter to spite Paul.^(F5)

We might need a note on Barnabas here. He was a Levite from Cyprus and his real name was Joseph. Because he was such "a man of encouragement" he was nicknamed "Barnabas," which conveys this very meaning. No doubt we remember that it was Barnabas who first introduced Paul to the reticent apostles at Jerusalem (Acts 9:27). When the great outreach to the Gentiles at Antioch began, Barnabas was sent to the city by the elders in Jerusalem (Acts 11:22). After Barnabas had witnessed the great expansion of the gospel among the Greeks he went to Tarsus to find Paul and bring him back to help in the work (Acts 11:25-26). The scripture tells us that they worked together in Antioch for a full year and taught great numbers of people. Of course, Barnabas later accompanied Paul on the First Missionary Journey. The scripture verifies that Barnabas was "a good man full of the Holy Spirit and faith" (Acts 11:24).

In this first verse we also see the mention of Titus. Although the writer Luke never speaks of him in Acts, we do know that this young man was very close to Paul. In Titus 1:4 Paul refers to him as his own son in the faith. In 2 Corinthians 8:23, we are told that Titus was Paul's partner and faithful helper. It seems certain that Titus was taken to the council to be "Exhibit A," as a convert from the Gentile world.^(F6) It is even likely that he hailed from the great Gentile center at Antioch. No doubt he was a bright young man and a sterling example of what it meant to follow Jesus in the faith of Father Abraham. After all, Father Abraham was called the Father of many nations (Genesis 17:4).

Paul continues regarding his Jerusalem visit, "I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain" (2:2). It is entirely possible that Paul had an inner revelation prompting him to get the circumcision question settled. Also, it would have been a normal procedure for Paul to have presented his ideas to the chief apostles privately before the matter would be aired publicly.

We must be aware that the questions of circumcision and of keeping the law were questions that struck at the very heart of the Gentile mission. We remember that Peter was given the "keys" to the kingdom of God by Christ himself (Matthew 16:19). He could in a sense open the door to the Gentiles or close it. In fact, we see that he has already acted by opening the door first to Israel in Acts 2, to the Samaritans in Acts 8 and to some God-rearing Gentiles in Acts 10.^(F7) This conference was crucial for the history of Christianity. We can be thankful that there were valiant people and champions like Paul who would not rest until these questions were permanently settled.

Paul first of all sets his gospel before the leaders at Jerusalem, or as he says, "those who seemed to be leaders." The English scholar, Peter Pett, notes that the repetition of this phrase and its equivalents (2:2,6,9) suggests that Paul had heard it often from the Judaizers who were attempting to depreciate him by comparing him to the Jerusalem leaders.^(F8)

Verses 3-5

THE CIRCUMCISION QUESTION

Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. Galatians 2:3

We need to understand that the Jerusalem church was steeped in Judaism. We read in Acts 6:7, that a large number of Jewish priests had joined the faith (cf. Acts 21:20). Jewish believers in Christ at that time were customarily circumcised and the same is true today. There was apparently a company of Judaizers in Jerusalem who felt it unthinkable that one could come to Christ the Messiah of Israel without circumcision and keeping the law. James, the Lord's brother and wise leader of the Jerusalem church, was a little like a hen trying to sit on two dozen eggs. He was scrambling to keep the Jewish factions happy while at the same time still reaching out to the Gentile world with the gospel.

It is important to realize that Paul did not condemn circumcision. On one occasion he even circumcised Timothy in order that he could better work in the midst of the Jewish people (Acts 16:3). He himself was circumcised as were all Jewish people. However, he believed that circumcision had no bearing upon salvation and that it was not to be forced upon the Gentiles who were coming to faith.^(F9) He knew that spiritually speaking believers in Christ were already circumcised with the circumcision of Christ (Colossians 2:11).

James had the delicate task of keeping the peace in a tension-filled conference. Sometime later he wrote the words of James 3:17-18 to the church, "But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere. Peacemakers who sow in peace raise a harvest of righteousness." ^(F10)

Paul puts the spotlight on those who were causing trouble at the conference, "This matter arose because some false believers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves" (2:4). It is clear that these false brethren were brought in by stealth. M. R. Vincent, the great Greek scholar, notes how the article marks this group as a well-known class and that the Greek pareisaktoun means literally "brought in by the side, and so insidiously, illegally."^(F11)

It is entirely possible that this Jewish faction in Jerusalem continued on, crystalized and eventually became known as the Ebionites. This Judaizing group was occasionally mentioned by the early Christian apologists. One of their characteristics was that they rejected all the writings of Paul as heretical. The group actually continued on through the early centuries of Christianity. They were a little like the husk on the grain of wheat that was destined to ultimately wither and fall away.

"We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you"(2:5). Again, we cannot be too thankful for the Apostle Paul who stood in the gap for us Gentiles. As the Lutheran, Johann Bengel says, "Truth precise, unaccommodating, abandons nothing that belongs to itself, admits nothing that is inconsistent with it."^(F12) The great Martin Luther himself said of his own contest, "Wherefore, God assisting me, my forehead shall be more hard than all men's foreheads…I give place to none. Yea, I am glad even with all my heart, in this point to seem rebellious and obstinate. And here I confess that I am and ever will be stout and stern and will not give one place to any creature."^(F13)

Verses 6-8

THOSE WHO SEEMED TO BE IMPORTANT

As for those who were held in high esteem – whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism – they added nothing to my message. Galatians 2:6

Colorado professor of religion, Sam Williams, points out that Paul seems to have a strategy (whether conscious or unconscious) and his strategy is to grant full recognition to Jerusalem's leaders only gradually. At last he would finally name them.^(F14) No doubt, this strategy was the result of the Judaizing tactic of demeaning Paul when he was compared to the Jerusalem leaders.

It is clear that Paul has the proper respect for the authorities however. Barclay remarks about this ticklish situation, "Paul's problem was that he could not say too little, or he might seem to be abandoning his principles; and he could not say too much, or it might seem that he was openly at variance with the leaders of the church. The result was that his sentences are broken and disjointed, reflecting his anxiety."^(F15) While the Jerusalem leaders, especially Peter and James, were mighty leaders in the church, Paul had it right that God does not judge men by their position. He does not show favoritism nor is he a respecter of persons (Acts 10:34; Romans 2:11). They had their own calling and they could add nothing to Paul's calling.

"On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised" (2:7).Essentially, they were agreeing here that the gospel to the circumcised and the gospel to the uncircumcised was one and the same gospel. The difference was only one of approach.^(F16)

Surely there has not been enough appreciation in the church of Paul's calling as Apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15; Romans 1:5; Ephesians 3:8). This dedicated man almost singlehandedly preserved and delivered the gospel to the whole Gentile world. He fought "tooth and nail" for its validity and he risked his life on many occasions to deliver it to us. We simply cannot imagine a Gentile Christian world without Paul.

"For God, who was at work in Peter as an apostle to the circumcised, was also at work in me as an apostle to the Gentiles" (2:8). This was not some arrangement made by men but it was an arrangement made and sealed by God himself.^(F17) It was an arrangement made not for man's glory but for God's glory.

Verses 9-10

THE RIGHT HAND OF FELLOWSHIP

James, Cephas and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised. Galatians 2:9

It is clear that James the brother of Jesus is the leader and spokesman of the Jerusalem church. He was the oldest brother of the Lord (Matthew 13:55ff) and was known as "James the Just." By early church tradition he was also known as "camel knees" because of the many calluses he had gained in his long sessions of prayer while kneeling.^(F18) John, whom we see in this verse, was undoubtedly the disciple and brother of the other James. This James had already suffered martyrdom at the hands of Herod Agrippa I, as we see in Acts 12:2. His death would have happened just a few years earlier in AD 44.

The right hand of fellowship mentioned here sealed the agreement. The Greek expression (dexiav edwkan koinwniav) appears only here in the New Testament and was not a distinctively Jewish custom.^(F19) It was a custom however in parts of the pagan world and apparently has been passed down to our western world. With this agreement the chief apostles in Jerusalem decided to minister primarily to the Jews while Paul was to administer the "gospel of the foreskin,"^(F20) taking the good news primarily to Gentile people.

"All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I had been eager to do all along" (2:10). No doubt the leaders were thinking about the poor who were in the city of Jerusalem. This city has continued to be one of the poorest in the nation. Several years ago I directed a large food distribution program in Israel and an unusually large portion of our donations went to the very poor Orthodox Jews living in the heart of Jerusalem.

Paul was eager to minister to the poor and no doubt had already been inspired by the offering taken at Antioch. It was one of Paul's great projects to gather and offering for Jerusalem from the many Gentile churches he had founded (1 Corinthians 16:1-2). On Paul's last trip to the city he delivered this large offering to the saints in Jerusalem (Acts 24:17). It is one of the ironies of Christianity that the first general offering in church history was taken to assist Israel. It is sad that this enlightened custom was not continued.

We cannot help but notice some small differences in the requests of the elders here and in their requests recorded in Acts 15:20. The council decision mentions that Gentiles also should abstain from food offered to idols, sexual immorality, strangled animals and from blood. Paul may have felt that these were trifling things that were perhaps unworthy of mention. Christians already abstained from sexual immorality and the other things were matters of common courtesy when associating with Jewish believers.

Verses 11-14

PAUL'S CONFLICT WITH PETER

When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. Galatians 2:11

This is without a doubt one of the most dramatic and tense episodes in the New Testament.^(F21) It is difficult to place this conflict with Peter chronologically speaking. It would seem awkward placing it immediately after the famous decision made by the Jerusalem Council. More than likely this conflict came immediately before the council and may have helped precipitate it.

Whether before or after the council, we can see that Paul was not about to let things slip. Wendel Phillips in 1852 said at a Massachusetts antislavery meeting, "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty!"^(F22) Paul could not let down for a moment lest the truth and liberty of the gospel be compromised.

Once again we simply must stop to admire Paul. He was an unusual person who had become like steel in the refining fires of persecution and opposition. Oh that we had more leaders like him today! "Francis Asbury, first bishop of the Methodist Church in the United States, once prayed at a deacon ordination, 'O Lord, grant that these brethren may never want to be like other people.'" Also, the English art critic John Ruskin once said, "I fear uniformity. You cannot manufacture great men any more than you can manufacture gold."^(F23)

Peter was obviously in the wrong although he still held the keys to the kingdom. His wrong was a public one and it was necessary for Paul to deal with it in a public manner. We know from the Bible that great men were often wrong. Nathan the prophet once instructed David to go ahead and build the Lord's temple. Soon after, the prophecy was corrected and he had to tell King David that he would not be permitted to build the temple.^(F24) That must have been really embarrassing for Nathan.

"Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group" (2:12). We need to understand the setting here. It probably took place in what was called the "Agape Meal" or "Love Feast" in the early church. This was a common meal in which rich people, poor people and even slaves enjoyed a meal together. Barclay says that it may have been the only good meal the slaves had all week. At some point in this meal the Lord's Supper was also celebrated.^(F25)

We can picture Peter enjoying this meal with his Gentile friends when suddenly the door opens and a Jerusalem deputation from James steps in. The Greek in this verse is in the imperfect tense and suggests that Peter was in the habit of eating with Gentiles.^(F26) Peter had already learned the lesson about eating with Gentiles in his episode with the Gentile Cornelius (Acts 11:1-18). Also, he no doubt remembered that Jesus sometimes ate with Gentiles (Matthew 9:10-11). However, when Peter saw the Jerusalem dignitaries sent from James he slinked away from the Gentile table. J. B. Lightfoot, English Bishop and theologian, mentions Peter's actions saying, "the words describe forcibly the cautious withdrawal of a timid person who shrinks from observation."^(F27)

"The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray" (2:13). Because of Peter's example, others began to slip away from the Gentile table and join the Jerusalem delegation with its kosher food. How true the words of Proverbs 29:25, "Fear of man will prove to be a snare…." We see that even Barnabas, that faithful friend and traveling companion of Paul, was also drawn away. Barnabas was one of the founders of the Antioch work. In addition, he probably knew more about the Gentile mission than anyone besides Paul. Yet, he fell away leaving an awful example. In the Greek, the word for "separated" or "dissembled" is upokrisei and is rightly translated as "hypocrisy" here in the NIV. It is a very strong word used only on one other occasion.

This episode reminds me a lot of days gone by in my former denomination. One of the critical doctrines was that of "closed communion." With this doctrine it was forbidden to share the Lord's Supper with any Christian outside the denomination. I thought then and still think today that this was one of the most unchristian church practices that I have ever witnessed.

Stott remarks of this whole ugly episode, "If Paul had not taken his stand against Peter that day, either the whole Christian church would have drifted into a Jewish backwater and stagnated, or there would have been a permanent rift between Gentile and Jewish Christendom, 'one Lord, but two Lord's tables.'"^(F28)

"When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, 'You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?'" (2:14). No doubt Peter had been stuffing his face with wonderful Gentile delicacies like fried ham, pork chops and shrimp but suddenly these things may have begun to give him heartburn.

Paul may not have been a person of commanding presence or speech (2 Corinthians 10:10) but here his words are like a cannon volley. No doubt the great Peter wilted under his assault. This was not some personal argument but was a matter of incredible theological significance for then and for now. As Luther said, "From Peter's example the Gentiles could not help but draw the conclusion that the law was necessary unto salvation."^(F29)

Verses 15-18

HOW DOES A PERSON GET JUSTIFIED?

We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified. Galatians 2:15-16

It may be that Paul's address to Peter actually stops with verse 14, although it is difficult to tell for certain. It seems that verses 15-21 are designed to reach a wider audience.^(F30) Paul appears to be actually summarizing the great Christian doctrine of justification in these verses. In fact the subject is mentioned here for the first time in the epistle.

Justification (dikaioutai) is an extremely important doctrine. Luther once said, "If the article of justification be once lost, then is all true Christian doctrine lost."^(F31) Paul, some years later in his Epistle to the Romans, would deal thoroughly with the subject of justification and the related subject of imputed righteousness.

Justification is a forensic term right out of the courtrooms in ancient times. It is "God's declaration that the demands of his law have been fulfilled in the righteousness of his Son. The basis for this justification is the death of Christ."^(F32) It is clear in scripture that justification is a once-and-forever act of God toward believers. Through justification God has declared us "blameless," "not guilty," and "acquitted" of all our sin. It is also clear in scripture that one Christian cannot be justified more than another since this is a one-time act of God on behalf of each believer.

In Romans 5:18 we read, "Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men." In 2 Corinthians 5:19 it is said "that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them…." Hebrews 10:14 goes on to make plain that by the one sacrifice of himself, the Lord has made us perfect forever. This "forever" justification is made effective in our lives the moment we accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior by faith and through grace. However, it was a fact in God's mind eons ago.

The popular theologian Dr. J. I. Packer says, "Justification is decisive for eternity, being in effect the judgment of the last day brought forward."^(F33) Paul sums it up another way in Romans 8:30 saying, "And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified." The Bible says that we were chosen in Christ before the creation of the world (Ephesians 1:4). We were thus predestined, called and justified before the world began. In other words, our salvation is a "done deal." That is why there can be no condemnation. As Paul will say later in his Book of Romans "…If God is for us, who can be against us?" (Romans 8:31).

So, although it was impossible to be justified by keeping the law, it is now possible for all of us to be justified by the grace of God and by simple faith in his Messiah who died for us. The great debt of sin was paid by his blood and the statutes against us were nailed to the cross of Jesus (Colossians 2:14). How difficult it was for Paul to get this simple truth across. "Paul had a difficult time in proclaiming the gospel to a world that had never known anything like it."^(F34)

The great word "justification" has almost disappeared from our vocabulary in these postmodern times. It is likely that not so many Christians could even adequately define the concept but yet it remains a critically important doctrine. It is central to the New Testament and central to the Epistle of Galatians.^(F35)

In verse 16, there has been some discussion as to whether the statements in this verse should be read "faith in Christ" or "faith of Christ." It should be pointed out that most translations see this phrase as the Greek objective genitive. That would make it read "faith in Christ."^(F36)

In every religious system of the world besides Christianity, people in some way or another are attempting to establish their own righteousness.^(F37) Christianity is unique in seeing that our righteousness is established already in Christ and in his death. We are thus declared righteous and we are justified if God's eyes. Court is over! It's that simple.

"But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we Jews find ourselves also among the sinners, doesn't that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not!" (2:17). Albert Barnes, the Presbyterian theologian, may have the best understanding of this verse. He says, "Paul here has reference to an objection which has in all ages been brought against the doctrine of justification by faith, and which seems to have existed in his time, that the doctrine leads to licentiousness."^(F38) Paul responds to such nonsense with his characteristic Greek me genoito, "may it never be!" Christians cannot continue to live in sin. When we do slip and fall there is that wonderful verse in 1 John 1:9 which says, "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness."

Now Paul inserts a verse that has caused interpreters some degree of trouble. He says, "If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a lawbreaker" (2:18). This verse might even be some reference to Peter's hypocritical act in trying to rebuild justification by law. Of course, such a thing was never possible in the first place.

Verses 19-21

DYING TO THE LAW – LIVING FOR CHRIST

For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. Galatians 2:19

Pett remarks here, "When considering the mystery of 'the atonement' we must recognize that one picture alone cannot do it justice, as we have seen here. It is substitution, it is representation, it is propitiation, it is reconciliation, it is expiation, it is atonement. It is all these and more."^(F39) As the scripture makes plain in many places, we died with Christ. In doing so we also died to the law. It has no more claim upon us. It is perfectly clear from this Antioch contest that some in the party of James had not yet seen themselves as dead to the law.^(F40)

It is important to note as Morris points out, "The verb is in the perfect tense, which means not simply that at some time in the past Paul was crucified with Christ, but that he continues in the capacity of one crucified with Christ."^(F41)

In 2 Corinthians 5:21, the great transaction is appropriately summed up, "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God."

Now Paul makes one of the greatest statements regarding the atonement and our place in it. He says, "I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me" (2:20). The Greek here is in the perfect passive and speaks of an event that is done. However, there is another side to this crucifixion of ourselves. Although the matter is done and finished we still must consider it so on a daily basis. We must daily reckon ourselves to be dead and in that way put to death anything of our natural man that seems to be rising up. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:31, "I die every day…." Paul is no doubt speaking of his sinful nature and his dealing with it. He says in Galatians 5:24, "Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires."

Paul closes this chapter saying, "I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!" (2:21). Luther once commented, "If my salvation was so difficult to accomplish that it necessitated the death of Christ, then all my works, all the righteousness of the law, are good for nothing. How can I buy for a penny what cost a million dollars?"^(F42) Clearly the law could not save us. Those who lived under the law in ages past were looking forward to the Messiah who was to come. He was to be their salvation (cf. Romans 3:25; Hebrews 10:4). How futile for us now to look back to the law, expecting to gain righteousness and justification by our own meager works.

This great contest in Antioch was one of the sharpest and most severe in all the pages of the New Testament. Apparently it ended well for Paul because he remained true to the gospel. It apparently ended well for Peter who stood corrected.^(F43) For certain, it ended well for the believers gathered there as they witnessed one of the greatest defenses of the faith in all Christian history.

CHAPTER THREE