Commentary on Galatians (16)
The historical aspect of the situation – what happened and when it happened – carries some significance with the Galatians, since Paul is probably responding to something that the Judaizers said. Perhaps they distorted the facts to assert their doctrine. But if so, then the Galatians would know the exact situation that Paul is addressing – it is the very one that the Judaizers mentioned, only that Paul is now telling his side and setting the record straight.
However, just because the historical aspect of the passage is important to the Galatians does not mean that we must know as much about it as they do in order to derive from it the full benefits intended for us. There are some uncertainties as to Paul's meaning concerning the historical side of the situation, but unlike the Galatians, we are not directly affected by the Judaizers' attack. Of course, we do face false teachers who assert similar doctrinal distortions, and we find that Scripture equips us with the principles to answer them, no matter how they arise in each generation.
So, regarding the historical aspect of the passage, if the information is not there, then it means that we do not need to know it. What we do know is that at a given place and a given time, and possibly on the same occasion as 2:1-2, Paul and his companions were pressured into circumcising Titus. They resisted, and maintained that Gentiles could receive complete salvation by faith in Jesus Christ without undergoing circumcision, and without adopting Jewish laws and customs. These are God's people in the truest and fullest sense, and they are spiritually inferior to no one. This is so that the truth of the gospel might remain with the Galatians, and with the Gentiles. All of this lies on the surface of the text – there is still more to notice on this level, as we will see below – and it is best to refrain from speculation beyond this point, but derive from the passage only what is there. In this way we avoid the danger of building elaborate interpretations, especially ones that affect doctrine and conduct, on conjectures and uncertainties.
That said, although we can infer only a little about the history, the passage provides much information that is relevant to any generation about this doctrinal aberration and the proper perspective with which we must confront it. And this information is communicated in such a manner that does not demand a precise understanding of the historical details behind the text. Thus it may not tell us everything that we wish to know to satisfy our curiosity, but it contains everything that Paul wishes to convey and that God requires us to learn.
First, we know the nature of the troublemakers – Paul calls them "false brothers." These are people who claim to be Christians, but their claim is false. This means that they are in fact non-Christians, and therefore destined for hell. They are false believers not only because of the manner in which they assert their false doctrine (i.e. "infiltrated our ranks"), but as discussed earlier (1:6-9), because of the fact that they believe and/or preach this false doctrine. Those who affirm or promote such a doctrine in any way are unbelievers, but it is important to keep in mind that they claim to be believers.
This point is most significant. There are those who reject the faith outright without pretense, but then there are those who claim to be something that they are not. For example, although Catholic doctrine differs in its doctrinal aberrations, in principle it affirms the same errors as those addressed by Paul's letter. This makes one equivalent to the other, since they both fall under the apostle's broad condemnation against a different gospel, not that there is any other.
Since this is the case, it necessarily means that all Catholics who believe as Catholics should (not just what they call themselves) are in fact non-Christians, even though they claim to be Christians. And in turn this means that God will send all Catholics to hell, where they will suffer everlasting extreme torment, just like he would the rest of the non-Christians and unbelievers. In practice, this means that Catholics must never be treated as if they are Christians, although they claim to depend on Jesus Christ for their salvation (since this is not all that they claim). They are no more closer to salvation than Mormons, Buddhists, and atheists. They are unregenerate individuals that are legitimate targets for evangelism – they need to hear the true gospel and turn away from their sacrilegious beliefs and rituals.
April 06 2007 | Expositions