Wednesday 10 October 2012

Background

To understand why Paul's simmering anger finally boils over inthese verses we need to remember what lies behind his letter to theGalatians. The first Christ-followers were all Jews, who believedthat the risen Jesus was, indeed, God's chosen and anointed one,the Jewish messiah who would restore the kingdom of David. Quitereasonably, they assumed that this new messianic community was aJewish movement for Jewish people. So if non-Jews (Gentiles) wantedto join them they would need to become Jews first, which meantaccepting the law of Moses. Most significantly, that meantthekosherdiet and male circumcision. This was the strict positionmaintained by the prominent Jewish-Christian church in Jerusalem,under the strong leadership of James, the brother of Jesus (Galatians 1:19).

Paul, himself an ultra-strict Jew, was convinced that this waswrong. For him, the true people of God were defined, not by the lawof Moses, but by the faith of Abraham. And that, crucially, camefirst. So to impose the law of Moses, in full or in part, ongentile Christ-followers was, for Paul, a kind of slavery and adenial of Christ. For only faith in God's promise would lead to newlife - "the hope of righteousness" (v. 5).

It seems that Paul's opponents, led by James (Galatians 2:11-14), had been undermining Paulby suggesting that, in fact, he supported the circumcision ofgentile Christ-followers. That, for Paul, would make Christirrelevant. And at this point he explodes, and says that if Jamesand his supporters were so keen on circumcision they should finishthe job by cutting off their testicles too! Ouch! Not very'Christian', you might think, but for Paul the essential truth ofthe gospel (good news about Jesus) was at stake, and he was very,very angry.

Of course, the law of Moses was concerned with much more thanjust diet and circumcision, and Paul knew he risked beingcriticised for rejecting it as far as gentile Christ-followers wereconcerned. The law made many ethical demands too, and these stillmattered. The freedom he defended so passionately was not a freedomto behave as you want, but rather a freedom to live as God wants,putting the needs of others before your own. Otherwise, said Paul,the whole Church would tear itself apart.

To Ponder

• Despite strong opposition from Jewish Christians, Paul'sunderstanding of 'the gospel' was the one that lasted beyond theend of the first century. One unintended consequence was thatChristianity rapidly lost touch with its Jewish roots and becameincreasingly shaped by Greek philosophy. Was that a good or a badthing, do you think? Why?

• There are 613 commandments in the law of Moses. How do youthink Christians should decide which ones are still binding onthem?

• Which should take priority in the Church: arguing about who'sright and who's wrong, or loving your neighbour as yourself? Why?Does deciding on 'right' and 'wrong' ever matter more? If so,when?