Be Careful of what you Rebuild

‘But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not! For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God.’ Galatians 2:17-19

We have before us one of the more difficult texts in the book of Galatians. The key to unlocking the text is the key to all Bible interpretation; we must find out who is speaking and what is the issue that occupies the speaker’s mind. Most readers will know that Galatians chapter 2 is Paul’s continued defense of the gospel. He rehearses some of his early history to show that this gospel came to him directly from God. He held firmly to that message and was in no wise influenced by the apostles in Jerusalem or by his former buddies of the Jewish Circumcision Party. When it came to holding to the gospel Paul refused to budge, not yielding even for an hour “that the truth of the gospel might continue” (vs 5). Paul was happy to get the approval of the Apostolic brain trust in Jerusalem (vs 9) but he in no way required it. The gospel was a shocking message given by God Himself and Paul would stand with it to the end.

There was, however, one sad event that disturbed the peace between himself and the other apostles. At a Jew/Gentile potluck in Antioch, Peter had suddenly gone weak in the knees and in Paul’s mind had jeopardized the gospel message. At this largely Gentile church Peter was enjoying his full freedom in Christ, eating whatever foods he desired and drinking from unwashed cups. He was having the time of his life laughing and roaring with these rough-necked Gentiles who had recently believed in Jesus of Nazareth as their Savior. But his joy quickly came to a halt when he spotted a few Jewish men who he knew to be close associates of James. Peter was well aware of the tension that existed in Jerusalem between those Jews who embraced their new-found freedom and those traditionalists, the Circumcision Party, who staunchly held to strict obedience to the Mosaic Law.

Seeing these men enter, Peter froze, then quickly shifted seats and sat at the kosher table and once again acted like a Jew. In many contexts this would seem like a small sin and one that could be handled privately. But because of Peter’s high position, his influence over Barnabas and others, his knowledge of the debate raging in the capital city and the public nature of his act, Paul decided something must be done. He stood up and rebuked Peter publicly, right there at the potluck. Talk about chutzpah!

When verse 15 begins there is an almost imperceptible shift from Paul’s biographical narrative to his theological interpretation. Its even difficult to know exactly where his rebuke of Peter ends. But it hardly matters. Whether Paul is continuing to speak to Peter in verses 15 - 21 or he has now turned his argument to the Galatian Christians is immaterial. What is important to know is that this section is one of the great theological defenses of the gospel in the Bible. We feel the sobriety of these verses. The only problem is ‘what do they mean’?

Verses 15 and 16 are rather clear. Paul emphasizes several times over that faith alone justifies the sinner and that works, anything that man can add, can do nothing to improve one’s standing with God. The works that Paul is talking about are most likely the ceremonial aspects of the law covenant, such as eating, drinking, holidays, sabbaths, and other rituals demanded by the Old Covenant. We say this for several reasons. First, this issue of eating was exactly what caused Peter to stumble when first confronted with the Gentile issue. One remembers well his experience on a rooftop in Acts 10 where God in a stunning vision, convinced Peter that anything purified by the gospel was ceremonially clean. Peter bowed to God’s wisdom and proceeded to enter Cornelius’ house and preach the gospel. Peter now understood the freedom of the gospel and he carried this conviction with him to Antioch. Second, Peter’s sin had nothing to do with obeying the moral law. He was in no way abusing his freedoms by engaging in questionable moral acts and justifying them by his new-found freedom. If anything, Peter was going in the opposition direction. He was moving away from this newly discovered freedom back to his former bondage under the law. He was not running from law but to it. Third, Peter’s act was not one motivated by social convenience, but a theological act that put him at odds with the clear direction of the gospel. In other words, Peter was moving backwards, he was rebuilding the prison walls that God had torn down, he was moving away from gospel freedom. Paul saw this as serious matter.

So now we come to our main text in verses 17-19. To understand them we must keep in mind the context with the behavior of Peter lurking behind it all.

Verse 17 begins Paul’s analysis of what happened in the Peter situation. Paul is a great doctor of the human heart and discerner of human motives and at no point does he shine brighter than here. He begins, “If, however, while we seek to be justified by Christ we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin?” Paul is echoing exactly what happened to Peter. He had fully bought into the gospel of justification by faith alone and seemed to be reveling in its freedom. But suddenly he had a depressing thought. As he enjoyed his freedom of the gospel his traditional Jewish friends would think he had become a Gentile sinner, playing fast and loose, as it were, with the Jewish law, The word sinner had been used once before in this epistle in verse 15 and it specifically referred to the activities of Gentiles who disregarded all those Mosaic stipulations. And now Peter froze up thinking the same thing would be said of him. ‘That Peter,’ would say the Circumcision Party in Jerusalem, ‘has become a sinner who is sold out to the Gentile way of life.’

Whoa! Could anything terrify Peter more than to be called a sinner by his Jewish peers?

Paul then asks the rhetorical question. If being justified by faith made one a sinner, that would make Christ, whose gospel it is, a minister of sin. And that can never be. Who wants to say that that enjoying gospel freedom ordained by Christ makes one a sinner? Is Christ a minister of sin? Just the opposite. Those new found freedoms that the gospel affords are in every sense good.

Paul then turns the tables on the those who would return to the works of the law after having received the gospel. By now the reader knows this is just another argument for the main theme of the book. The gospel can in no wise be tainted by legal additions, ceremonies, feelings, or the like. When a believer begins to rebuild into his life these Mosaic laws, he is rebuilding that which God has destroyed with the gospel. And if you do that, says Paul, you make yourself a transgressor. Why? Because you have violated the freedom of the gospel.

Do you see the contrast? One should not care if others think you are sinning because of your freedom in Christ. But if you violate your gospel freedom by adding works to your acceptance before God you are making yourself a true transgressor of the will of God.

Once again, we find that Paul’s entire argument in Galatians is to defend the freedom of the gospel. The great sin is not to enjoy freedom to eat and drink what one likes, the great sin is to rebuild dietary restrictions into your life thinking they bring one closer to God. To Paul that is the great error.

And isn’t this exactly what Peter did? After the Cornelius revelation Peter began to live a life of gospel freedom. He could fellowship with Gentiles, with Jews, with those who loved the law, with those who knew nothing of the law, without worrying about men’s censure. He was enjoying his new freedom in Christ. God had torn down all those old prejudices that has crusted over his soul and Peter was the better for it. But now, as those Jewish men from Jerusalem entered the room, Peter began rebuilding that wall that God has torn down. He retreated into a Jewish, legalistic mindset that succumbed to the idea that favoring the Jewish brothers was compatible with the gospel. And to correct this Paul must speak up, loudly and publicly.

Verse 19 is another hard verse that has been interpreted widely. Paul is making another theological observation that can easily evade the reader. “I through the law died to the law that I might live unto God.” What does he mean by “through the law?” Again, thinking of the context, it probably means this. Because of man’s failure to keep the law and because its penalty was death, Jesus Christ must die on a cross to satisfy the law’s demands. Thus, in an ironical way, the law set the stage for its own demise. It required the death of the Savior. And through that demand of the law, the law was fully satisfied by the death of the Messiah. As a result all believers because of Christ’s death have died to the law and it no longer holds sway over them. And of course being dead to the law, one is now free to live to Christ.

This wonderful and mysterious truth leads Paul to write what is the most quoted verse in Galatians, verse 20. When Christ died, Paul died; died to the law. And because he died to the law he can now live by the power of the Holy Spirit by faith.

What do we glean from this wonderful section of scripture? Simply this. In the mind of God, anything that threatens the purity of the gospel message must be rooted out and killed. To live in freedom under the grace of the Lord leads to a life that gives Him all the glory. This pleases God immensely. But to live as if one must add some human work to the perfect cross-work of Jesus Christ is an abomination to God that must be repented of. Be careful, dear Christian, not to build again that which God so graciously destroyed. God slew His Son so that we would never again be held in bondage to the law. Christ died so that we could live in freedom. He tore down all those legal regulations that bind our hearts to self. Don’t build them again, dear Christian. Live under the gracious hand of a gracious God who from beginning to end has saved your soul without accepting one little contribution of works no matter how wonderful they be.