Advertise on podcast: Sovereign Grace Community Church

As with Jew/Gentile and master/slave relationships, male/female relationships among believers must also be defined and governed by the realities of the new creation inaugurated with Jesus' resurrection. This applies to Christian marriages, but also to the Church's life and ministration as it is Jesus' fullness. This message is the first of two dealing with the male/female question, and it examines broad scriptural considerations that are fundamental for forming a biblical theology of male/female relationships in the new creation.

This third message in the present excursus on human distinctions in the new creation examines two of the particular distinctions Paul mentions here and in his Colossian epistle, namely that between Jew and Greek and between slave and free man.

This second message in the excursus on distinctions in Christ's Church examines key principles of Christian life and relationships, how those principles relate to one another, and how they function in practice.

Paul's assertion that ends chapter 3 brings his argument to a climactic and definitive focal point. For it answers the Judaizing issue by denying its fundamental premise, namely a distinction between Jew and Gentile among Messiah's people. Paul insisted that this distinction no longer exists because the Christ event has inaugurated a new human race having its substance in the resurrected Messiah Himself. But this means that all human distinctions have been transformed in Him, and so no longer exist as they did formerly. This excursus examines this new human reality and the implications for the Church as a community in which there is "no Jew or Gentile, male or female, slave or free man" because "Christ is all and is in all."

Paul's answer to the question, "Why the Law?" was that the Law served God's promises to Abraham. It did so first by formally ratifying the covenant relationship with Abraham's descendants. But it also advanced the promises, specifically by functioning as Israel's pedagogue. As such, the Law of Moses instructed, directed, and preserved God's covenant "son" with a view to the day of maturity when Israel would receive the promised inheritance.

Paul insisted that the Israelite covenant (Law of Moses) neither altered nor abrogated God's covenant promises to Abraham. The promises passed through the Law and found their fulfillment in the Messiah and His work. This being the case, it raises the question of why God introduced the Law of Moses into Israel's history; if the promises to Abraham preceded it and those promises weren't affected by it, what purpose did the Law serve? Paul's answer was that the Law served the promises, but perhaps not in the way that many believe.

Paul recognized that Abraham and God's covenant with him are key to understanding the messianic work and the new household God is building on Him. But the Israelite covenant (the Law of Moses) was instituted in between Abraham and the fulfillment of God's promises to him in the Messiah, Abraham's unique "seed." This interposing of the Law of Moses raises the question of its impact on the Abrahamic covenant and its promises, and Paul addressed that question in general terms before addressing the larger question of why the Israelite covenant at all? What purpose did it serve in the unfolding salvation history?

Paul introduced Abraham into his argument because he, and God's promises to him, are the criteria for defining the members of God's restored covenant household and the relationship between them. In a word, the Abrahamic family are now identified by their union with the Messiah, Abraham's promised son. Paul then further developed this truth by turning his attention to the Law of Moses and its role in God's purposes, firstly explaining the predicament it caused for the Abrahamic people, the implications of that predicament, and how God resolved it.

After rebuking the Galatians for their foolishness and lack of discernment, Paul introduced the patriarch Abraham to his argument. Many have viewed this simply as Paul providing a scriptural example of someone who was "justified by faith" apart from his works, but he actually had a much more profound reason for doing so. Paul understood that Abraham and his role in the salvation history were crucial to substantiating his claim that Jewish and Gentile disciples have equal status within the new covenant family that God is forming in His Son. For that family is the family promised to Abraham - a family consisting of people from every tribe, tongue and nation.

Paul openly confronted Peter when he lied against the truth of the gospel by his actions at Antioch, and he wasn't going to treat the Galatian believers any differently. And so, after recounting the Antioch episode, Paul turned his attention to his readers, confronting them with a series of pointed questions intended to make them step back and think about the significance and implications of yielding to the "agitators" seeking to lead them away from his gospel.

Paul recognized Peter's withdrawal from table fellowship with Gentile believers as a lie against the truth of the gospel, for the gospel proclaims God's inauguration of a new human family defined by faith in the Messiah and union with Him through His Spirit. Thus Paul concluded his treatment of "justification by faith" with a profound confession acknowledging that he - and all who belong to Jesus the Messiah - had been crucified to the former order of human existence and now lived within Jesus' life and faithfulness as God's true Image-Son. And living in that way, Paul exalted God's grace and triumph on behalf of His beloved creation.

Paul's treatment of justification by faith was situated within his rebuke of Peter's hypocrisy among the believers at Antioch. Having demonstrated through his table fellowship that uncircumcised and non-observant Gentiles share full and equal status in God's renewed covenant household, Peter then denied that affirmation by withdrawing himself from his Gentile brethren when other Jewish disciples arrived from Jerusalem. Paul confronted him and condemned his hypocrisy, making his case through the truth of justification by faith.

The Galatian epistle provides one of Paul's explicit treatments of the issue of justification by faith, but all too often his treatment there is effectively divorced from the historical circumstance within which it is situated. And where this occurs, this doctrine is understood from a perspective and set of concerns that are different from Paul's. This message examines justification by faith as it was Paul's answer to the issue of Jew-Gentile distinction in the messianic community - the issue that Peter's separation from the Gentile brethren at Antioch helped put in the spotlight.

Paul ended his rehearsal of his background with an account of his confrontation of Peter at Antioch. This episode was the context for his treatment of the doctrine of "justification by faith" in the Galatian epistle, and so it's crucially important to understand what was happening at Antioch with Peter in order to understand what Paul meant by this doctrine and how it pertained to the circumstance at hand.

Paul realized that he was singling out himself and his gospel when he condemned anyone and everyone who differed from the message he was proclaiming. And by insisting that he obtained his gospel without any input from the other apostles, he was allowing room for the charge that he had innovated his own message alongside - and perhaps even in contradiction of - the gospel being proclaimed by Jesus' other representatives. He could expect that this charge was being leveled against him by those who were "troubling" the Galatian believers and challenging his gospel. And so Paul knew that he needed to show that the other apostles affirmed both his apostleship and his message. If he couldn't, then he had no right to make the claims he was making.