Second, we know the motive of the false brothers. Paul writes that they advance their doctrine "to make us slaves." Later in the letter he adds, "Not even those who are circumcised obey the law, yet they want you to be circumcised that they may boast about your flesh" (6:13). The evil intention of these false brothers is to claim the Gentile as their own disciples and to subjugate their faith under their own customs. The circumcision of the Gentiles would signify the success of their proselytization campaign, and not a covenant relationship with God.

Some commentators again insinuate that Paul's judgment is false or unfair. They seem rather keen to affirm the sincerity of the Judaizers, and relativize the controversy so that it becomes only a matter of perspective. A few describe the Judaizers' intention in almost noble terms. But if these are not false brothers, and if their motive is not evil, then Paul would be wrong to speak as he does. The commentators cannot affirm biblical inspiration on the one hand and so flippantly suggest errors and exaggerations on the other.

The matter of inspiration and inerrancy is settled as a separate and prior question, but once it is assumed, the only possible interpretation here is that these are sham-Christians who introduce their false doctrine with selfish and sinister intentions. Since we have addressed this revolt against biblical authority under the first point, we will not take time to repeat our complaint.

The verse, like many others, raises the issue of judging motives. Since only God can perceive a person's thoughts and dispositions, and in ourselves we have no such ability, it is usually assumed that it is wrong for a man to declare or judge another's intentions. Although the principle is correct, the inference is false. This is because the common assumption ignores the fact that God has revealed much information about people's thoughts and intentions in Scripture (Hebrews 4:12).

We cannot perceive a person's heart, but God can perceive it and tell us about it. We can then repeat and apply his verdict. The refusal to do this does not come from a humble spirit, but a defiance against divine authority and biblical inspiration. Our inability to directly perceive people's thoughts and motives thus becomes an excuse to avoid confrontation. True humility readily applies the divine verdict against human depravity. But the arrogant and rebellious man pretends that God has not spoken.

Third, we know the significance of the dispute. Paul notes that nothing less than "the truth of the gospel" is at stake. Since the gospel is the power of God for salvation (Romans 1:16), and since to have no gospel or a false gospel is to be "eternally condemned" (Galatians 1:6-9), salvation itself is at stake. This theological controversy is literally a matter of life and death – that is, of eternal life and death, and of heaven and hell.

Paul fought hard to preserve this true gospel, so that its truth – the truth that saves – could remain. And this is why when the Galatians were tempted to follow another way, Paul called them stupid (3:1). Likewise, the Reformers fought to set men free from Rome, so that men might continue to have access to salvation through Christ. And like the Galatians, those who are attracted by the doctrines of Rome are very stupid people, since there is no salvation in the Catholic religion, but only futility and damnation.

But Rome is not the sole enemy of the gospel. Some have infiltrated our ranks, claiming to be Protestants or Evangelicals, to introduce confusion into the proper understanding of justification by faith. Here we have in mind the theologies of the New Perspective, the Federal Vision, some versions of so-called Messianic Christianity, and so on. Although the circumstances differ from Paul's day, the darkness of men's hearts remains the same, and the conflict is similar on the spiritual plane.

The present passage offers us the encouragement, understanding, and the authority to oppose them without restraint. These are false brothers who spread heresies out of evil motives, and at stake is again the truth of the gospel. Of course, we must avoid making unwarranted generalizations, lest we falsely condemn others. But after careful examination, we must apply the divine verdict – a false gospel is a false gospel, and a false brother is a false brother. When faced with a false gospel, whether it is something similar or different from what is considered here – the threat is always against the true gospel, and thus demands the same decisive and vehement reaction.

In a sense, there is no such thing as a petty theological disagreement, because the truth is at stake each time. Truth is never trivial, and whenever we believe something that is not the truth, we believe a lie. However, we do not fight, or split, or expel people from the church over every dispute, for we tolerate some theological disagreements in order to maintain peace and to allow discussion. The line is not drawn between important and unimportant doctrines, since there is no such thing as an unimportant biblical doctrine. Instead, the line that is drawn defines the relative significance of these important doctrines. When the dispute affects salvation, so that the consequence more final, then the matter is more urgent, and our reaction more drastic.

The line that defines the relative significance of biblical doctrines is often drawn here, that is, with salvation as the pivotal point. But this is in fact not strict enough, since it is determined by man-centered concerns. Even more important than the salvation of our souls, our deliverance from hellfire into everlasting life and peace, is the honor and glory of God. This is the end of our salvation in the first place. Therefore, false doctrines that misrepresent the nature of God are to be combatted with the same force and haste as those that obscure man's way to salvation through Christ.

For example, the heresy of open theism, even if we suppose for the moment that it does not affect salvation, cannot be long tolerated. Otherwise, it would be as if we say, "Let God suffer dishonor for a while. He can endure it, and no harm will come to him. The truth will be clear to all on the last day. Meanwhile, it is more important to address those false doctrines that threaten our salvation." To think this way is to allow self-preservation to dictate our spiritual priorities. This point is often obscured, since salvation is indeed the most noble among our many needs and wants. Still, we cannot take the sinful attitude that it is more urgent to save men than to defend God's honor, so that we pursue the former but neglect the latter, or make the former our highest reference point in theology and ministry rather than the latter.

Posted in Expositions | Permanent Link