Home Papers Sermons Creative Devotional Links About Me

...Other Papers

What is the nature of the freedom which Paul mentions in Galatians, and how is it to be experienced?

In the world’s thinking[1], freedom is conceived almost exclusively as ‘freedom from’[2] and pursued in terms of ‘a-topic independence’, and ‘unconditioned possibility’.[3] “Freedom is almost invariably freedom from the other: to ‘realize’ or ‘fulfil’ ourselves, to do ‘our own thing.’”[4] The question of who this ‘self’ is, or ought to be, is considered simply as a restatement of the freedom question. I am a self-directing individual – that is my identity.

“In the part [of the conduct of an individual] which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of course, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.”[5]

On this line of thinking, ‘my personal identity’ does not have any positive ontological content. Instead, ‘the person’ is simply a sphere to protect – to be left to itself, to make of itself whatever it will. Liberty is therefore a sacred safeguard for the enthronement of the self as sovereign.[6]

Anyone who reads Galatians expecting to find this kind of ‘freedom’ will receive a rude shock. Immediately we are confronted by Paul – apostolos – definitionally a ‘sent one’, who happily calls himself a doulos of Christ[7]. Paul is not his own man, he, along with the Galatians, belong to Christ[8] and are led by the Spirit[9]. More than that, they belong to each other – enslaving themselves to one another (douleuete, 5:13) and carrying each others’ burdens. In fact, such servitude is the essence of the ‘law of Christ’[10], and this law of Christ is to be fulfilled.

The ‘Apostle of freedom’ clearly has some very un-modern views about what constitues liberty. In this essay we will explore what Paul means by freedom in Galatians, and how such freedom is to be experienced. We will consider the nature of freedom and our experience of it together since the freedom which Paul has in mind is not the carte blanche of modernism to then be used however one feels. Instead, we will see that loving service is both the meaning and the expression of our Christian freedom. Thus the nature and the experience questions coalesce.

Foundations of Freedom

Before looking at our freedom in Galatians, we first examine three other freedoms outlined along the way. If we place our own freedom outside or above these freedoms, we will quickly fall into error.

The Freedom of the Trinity

In Galatians 4:6, Paul describes the Christian as caught up by the Spirit into the intimacy of the Father-Son relationship. God Himself shares a loving, other-centred communion which, through the sending of the Son (4:4) and the Spirit (4:6), is opened up to us also[11]. As we consider the free and sovereign relations of the Trinity, which are precisely relations of mutual service and submission[12], we must ask, Would we seek to be more ‘free’ than God?

The Freedom of Heaven

In Galatians 4:26 we are told that the Jerusalem that is above[13] is free. Yet the saints in glory, surrounding the throne in worship are not free because they are their own masters. Nor does their freedom consist in having infinite possibilities for action (including sin!). Would we seek to be more ‘free’ now than when we are before the throne?

The Freedom of Christ

As the Son[14], Christ is the Beloved One and Heir. As Lord[15], He is uniquely positioned to define freedom for us. Yet how is His freedom expressed? In humble service under the law[16] and in giving Himself in accursed crucifixion for our sins[17]. If His freedom is expressed in costly, other-centred service, Would we seek to be more ‘free’ than Christ?

Whatever notions of human freedom the Apostle has in mind, they find their context and their limit in these freedoms. Thus the freedom of Galatians will not be found in independence or in maintaining limitless potentialities[18]. Rather, our freedom, grounded in the divine freedom, comes in mutually constitutive relations of loving service.

We will hear more of this shortly. For now we discuss the particular situation into which Paul proclaimed his gospel of freedom.

The Situation in Galatia

The issue in Galatia was not, ‘how shall I – a sinner – be justified before a holy God’[19] but ‘how should we – a mixed congregation of Jews and Gentiles – continue as the people of God.’[20] Paul, though recognizing that the Galatians have genuinely begun the Christian life[21], fears nonetheless that they will be led into complete apostasy[22] by ‘the circumcision’[23]. This group[24], is perverting the gospel of Christ, making it no gospel at all[25]. Barrett characterizes their teaching as a mediating position between law and faith.

“This mediating position claims that Christ alone is sufficient for salvation, but if you wish to be fully a member of the visible people of God you must be circumcised and keep the law… Let them by all means believe in Jesus as the Christ, but let them not seek to avoid their legal obligation.”[26]

Paul could not be stronger in his opposition to such teaching[27] – works and faith; law and gospel; Moses and Christ cannot be co-ordinated on the same plane of operations. To do so is to lose entirely faith and gospel and Christ[28].

The essence of Paul’s argument[29] – Solus Christus

The enemies of the Gospel teach that the full rights of sonship are secured and enjoyed, not simply through Christ, but through obedience to an external standard (law). By contrast, Paul will have no ‘Jesus and…’ religion[30]. Any such syncretism denies fundamental truths:

Firstly, Christ has been crucified for our sins[31]. Paul’s reasoning is thus: ‘if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing.’[32] Christ certainly did not die for nothing[33]. Therefore, righteousness cannot be gained through the law.[34]

Secondly, Christ’s death redeemed us from the Law.[35] The blood of the Son paid for our release from the supervision of Law[36]. We would esteem His redemption as worthless if we sold ourselves back into slavery again[37].

Thirdly, we have the Spirit now through simply trusting Christ[38]. The Spirit Himself is the true marker of belonging to God’s family – of belonging to the life of God itself.[39] Therefore, we must not seek our identity in external markers but walk by Him.[40]

Fourthly, the pattern of God’s dealings with His people has always been by grace and through faith in Christ. The Judaizers cannot claim to be faithful to the Scriptures or to the traditions of Abraham – Abraham himself was made righteous through faith in Christ[41] and not by works.

Thus, Christ alone is our object of faith. Christ alone can redeem us from our sins, this age[42], the Law[43] with its curse[44], the flesh[45], even the world[46]. Christ alone makes us sons of God, heirs of the promise and members of the one family of believers.[47] There can be no addition to this work, only grateful acceptance, i.e. faith.[48]

Solus Christus as Freedom

The freedom of the Christian is a direct consequence of the doctrine of ‘Christ alone’. This is so since trust in anything apart from Christ – the Image – is idolatry, a breaking of the first commandment.[49] All idolatry is enslaving since idols demand to be served (worshipped)[50]. Without Christ, this worship goes to the elemental spirits, the stoikeia,[51] which enslave us. Therefore only Christ can free us, and, as we have seen, Christ will have no partners in His redemptive role. Thus it is solus Christus that guarantees our freedom.

Since this is so, our freedom is an un-mixed freedom. Just as the great ‘alone’ statements of the reformation refuse to be co-mingled with any counter-balancing factors, so Christian freedom must be proclaimed without mitigation. In this way, we can never have too much freedom (just as we can never have too much faith, or Christ, or grace etc.) The answer to the abuses of freedom is never to curb freedom. We must note that in the face of horrendous abuses, Paul never tells the Galatians, ‘you are free, but not that free!’ Nor does he say, ‘you’ve abused your freedom, I’m going to take it away for a bit until you learn!’. Instead Paul insists on more freedom, better freedom, purer freedom. Thus, freedom is not balanced by other forces like ‘service’ or ‘responsibility’. It is never a case of ‘Yes we are free, but we must keep that in check by remembering our …’ Such concepts as service or responsibility do not stand outside freedom as its referee. Service and responsibility are, instead, included as integral factors in our unmitigated liberty.[52]

We will now define more closely what we mean by freedom.

Freedom won

We first note that freedom is not a status enjoyed by man in himself. The world’s concept of freedom begins by assuming we have, or ought to have, freedom as a birth-right.[53] Paul will not entertain this thought. ‘When you did not know God, you were slaves’[54] says Paul. Even the Jews ‘were in slavery’[55] before they received the Son. Redemption is therefore a crucial concept in Galatians.[56] A person does not freely decide to unite themselves to Christ and so be redeemed. Instead, Christ redeems them in order that they may be free. Thus the ground of our freedom is not in some abstract liberty of indifference or spontaneity. The ground of our freedom is in the redeeming activity of the Triune God who lifts us from slavery and sets us on our feet as free partners with Him in His own life and history.

Freedom In

In what does our freedom consist? Following from our discussion above, we insist that our freedom is co-ordinated with the freedom of God Himself. We are made partners of the Covenant-God through the redemption of Christ, raising us to the fellowship which He Himself enjoys with the Father[57]. We marvel at the truth that, just as Christ is the Seed of Abraham[58], so we, in Christ, become Abraham’s seed[59]. Our identity could not be more closely united to Christ and His covenant purposes. In Him, we are sons and we will share in the promised inheritance. We have been given divine honours and dignity in the Gospel and our freedom is a freedom – in, with and through Christ – to live out this identity in joyful communion with God and His family.

Freedom From

Though we believe our ‘freedom to’ is by far the more important[60], it is helpful to insert a word about our ‘freedom from.’ Paul spells this out in terms of freedom from this present evil age; from our sins; from works of Law (and from the Law itself[61]); from the Law’s curse; from the desires of the flesh; and from the world.[62]

We note briefly the issue of our freedom from Law. It is the opinion of this essay that the Christian is entirely free from every aspect of Law[63] considered as a system of identity or approach to God.[64] The Christian makes use of Law, as the Apostle does, not as Law, but as Scripture[65]. Its time of guardianship (which was never salvific but only intended to foster hope in the Seed) has passed, and it has now gone into honourable retirement.

In all, then, we have received a comprehensive deliverance from the realm of the world, the flesh and the devil.[66]

This leads us naturally to our…

Freedom To

Chapter 5 contains two great purpose statements regarding the gift of freedom. In verse 1 we are reminded that ‘for freedom’ itself have we been set free. Thus our redemption makes us free to enjoy our dignity and worth in Christ and to live out our new creation status even now in this evil age. Such liberty is an end in itself, needing no higher ideal to justify its lavish enjoyment.

Yet, someone may counter, ‘what about verse 13? Aren’t we here confronted by a counter-claim on the Christian, one that holds our freedom in check?’ To answer, the ‘freedom’ which gives an opportunity for the flesh is not a true freedom which Paul counter-balances with some other, equally valid, notion called ‘service.’ The contrast is, rather, between ‘pseudo-freedom’ which works out in license and ‘true-freedom’ which works out in loving service. Therefore, the ‘freedom to…’ of the Christian is the freedom to serve one another in love. It is to be released from the desires of our own flesh (which is slavery) and to look to the other.

The section of Galatians from 5:13-6:10 is not occasioned by Paul addressing another group (turning now from the legalists to the licentious). Nor is he attempting to ‘put the brakes’ on our, potentially, run-away expectations for liberty. Instead, Paul is expressing the meaning of true freedom for community living, since our freedom derives from God’s freedom which is a freedom in community.

Paul’s exhortation to stand firm in true freedom is therefore accompanied by exhortations to foster community life. Enslavement to Law destroys community life (cf 2:11-13) now Paul will show how true unity is brought. The answer is, of course already at hand. The freedom of the Spirit, which they have been given[67], is a freedom that serves in love[68], that carries burdens, that achieves everything the Law describes[69] but does not produce. The call to freedom is therefore the call to sacrificial service of others in the power of the Spirit.

At this point, the question is therefore begged: If the Galatians had the Spirit, and had been set free, why were they not enjoying the fruits of this freedom?

Freedom distorted

We must note Paul’s eschatology. Though this present age is evil[70], the time has fully come[71]. Though we await righteousness[72], we have been declared righteous[73]. Though the harvest is future[74], we enjoy new creation now[75]. In the overlap of the ages, flesh and Spirit co-exist[76] – and they co-exist in me! Galatians 2:20 sums it up well: I have died, and now Christ lives in me. Yet, even though I have died, I now live in the flesh. In one sense my connection to the realm in which slavery operates is entirely severed – I have died. In another, this realm is very close at hand – I am living in it. And yet also Christ is living in me.

In this context Paul exhorts the Galatians to ‘live by faith in the Son of God’[77], to ‘walk by the Spirit’[78], to be led by Him[79] and to sow to please Him[80]. Negatively, he commands them not to indulge the flesh[81], or to gratify its desires[82], to remember our crucifixion of the flesh[83] and never to sow to please it[84]. The Christian is pictured as a battleground in which the desires of flesh and Spirit wage war (5:17). Yet, for a Christian to experience this battle in no way denies the reality of their freedom. In fact, the reality of such a battle within is evidence of the Spirit at work. That which perverts our freedom is not the struggle, it is yielding to the flesh which denies our redeemed status.[85]

So, just as the Gospel can be perverted by misuse such that it becomes no longer Gospel[86], so freedom can be perverted into no-freedom. Whilever the harvest is future, whilever there is flesh[87] to be sown to, the Christian can deny her own identity as new creation and invest in the realm from which she has been redeemed. Yet when such painfully inconsistent living continues, Christ is not really ‘formed’ in a person.[88] Paul desperately feels the incongruity of such living and wishes that the Galatians would walk in step with the Spirit. Yet, ‘out-of-step’ living remains the impossible possibility this side of resurrection.

Freedom and our experience

Freedom is ours in Christ, apart from any moral worth or effort and apart from any reference to an external code, be it Moses’ or the world’s. It is the freedom to be our true selves and to act in accordance with our God-given identity. This identity is as heirs of the promise, members of the covenant community and participants in the very life of God. As Luther says “The worth of our Christian liberty cannot be exaggerated.”[89]

Our freedom is experienced in the overlap of the ages in which the self-contradictory and self-contradicting possibility exists for enslaving ourselves again to the desires of the flesh, to this world and to the Law. Freedom is experienced, not by entertaining these possibilities[90], but by living out our new creation identity. We are thus most truly free when, through love, we enslave ourselves to Christ and one another.

APPENDIX

Paul’s Argument[91]

1:1 – 2:10 Paul establishes his own credentials as against the ‘certain men

key verse from James’. Both Paul and his message are not from men but

(1:8-9) from God.

2:11 – 21 This divine message and its messenger respect no human

key verse authority – even Peter’s. In Paul’s opposition to Peter we get

(2:15-16) the summary sentence for the next two chapters (2:15-16): a

person is, was, and ever shall be constituted a Christian (justified)

not by law but through faith in Christ.[92]

3:1 – 4:31 In these two chapters, Paul is corroborating the claim of 2:15-16

key verse which will need to be proved from the Hebrew Scriptures if it is

(3:26) to have any validity. Paul reminds us of the pre-Law

righteousness which Abraham had by faith. He is not a random

example for Paul but ‘the man of faith’ – the definitional believer and

the one to whom the covenant promises were spoken.

These promises, pre-dating the Law by 430 years, concerned the Seed[93]

and were never annulled by the Law. Instead the Law itself spoke

against ‘works of Law’ and pronounced a curse which is only

taken away in Christ. As the Law points away from itself it acts as our

‘guardian’ leading us to Christ and His coming. At this point Paul has

proved the claim of 2:15-16 that membership of the people of God has

always been through faith in Christ. He therefore summarizes with the

key verse: “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.”

The implications of this for Gentiles is that they are equal co-inheritors

with the Jews. They can call Abraham their earthly father and God,

their heavenly Father. Christ, through His death, has made them all

unimprovably united to God and His promises. Going back to Law

is therefore not just anachronistic, it is a denial of the work of Christ.[94]

5:1 – 6:18 Paul applies all these truths to the Galatians with the key verse

key verse for this section. They are free (indicative) and must continue

(5:1) free (imperative) in Gospel grace, rejecting Law as any kind of means

to define their Christian standing. Instead their communal life

(guaranteed through faith in Christ, but put in jeopardy by the Judaizers)

ought to be marked by unity in loving service. To live in such a way is

to live the life which the Law described but could never produce.

Instead it is the Spirit-empowered new creation who can and does

live above the Law, the flesh and even the world.

Bibliography

Martin Luther, The Epistle to the Galatians

Martin Luther, The Freedom of the Christian, 1520

J.D.G. Dunn, Christian Liberty, Paternoster, 1993

J.D.G. Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, A&C Black, 1993

C.K. Barrett, Freedom and Obligation, SPCK, 1985

Timothy George, Galatians – New American Commentary, Broadman & Holman, 1994

Ben Witherington, Grace in Galatia, T&T Clark, 1998

R.Y.K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians, Eerdmans, 1988

Donald Guthrie, Galatians, Thomas Nelson, 1969

G. Walter Hansen, Galatians, IVP, 1994

R. N. Longenecker, Galatians, Word, 1990

T.H. Epp, Flesh and Spirit in Conflict, Back to the Bible, 1968

Colin Gunton, The One, the Three and the Many, CUP, 1993

Karl Barth, ‘The Gift of Freedom’, The Humanity of God, Collins, London, 1961

John Webster , Barth’s Moral Theology, T&T Clark, 1998

Paul Barnett, Romans – ‘Appendix: The New Perspective’, The Revelation of God’s Righteousness,

http://www.thepaulpage.com/Summary.html

last checked 16 Dec 2005

http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_New_Perspectives.htm

last checked 16 Dec 2005

http://www.hornes.org/theologia/content/rich_lusk/a_short_note_on_n_t_wright_his_reformed_critics.htm#9b

last checked 16 Dec 2005

Back to other papers

---

Home	The God who is...	Sermons and Bible Studies
Common Objections	Quotes from History	Extras
Not yet a Christian?	Links	Contact

Copyright 2007 Christ the Truth

---

[1] Such thinking, though it sounds very modern, traces back well before Galatians into antiquity

[2] cf. J.D.G. Dunn, Christian Liberty, Paternoster, 1993, p9ff

[3] John Webster, Barth’s Moral Theology, T&T Clark, 1998, p111

[4] Such freedom is grounded in a firm belief that no-one should intrude upon our personal sphere, but is extremely uncertain about who it is who resides in this sphere: how such personhood is defined and protected, who we are, and who we should be. Colin Gunton, The One, the Three and the Many, CUP, 1993, p65.

[5] John Stuart Mill from On Liberty quoted in J.D.G. Dunn, Christian Liberty, Paternoster, 1993, p21

[6] Note the idolatrous slogan of the recent Reebok advertisements, ‘I am what I am.’ Man has taken it upon himself to assign to himself value and identity. We are our own point of reference, cut adrift from God and the world, freely inventing our own independent reality. We should note that only the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob can claim ‘I am what I am.’ Everything else ‘is what He says it is’!

[7] Gal 1:10

[8] Gal 3:29

[9] Gal 5:18

[10] Gal 6:2

[11] ‘God’s freedom is the freedom of the Father and the Son in the unity of the Spirit… God’s own freedom is trinitarian, embracing grace, thankfulness, and peace. It is the freedom of the living God. Only in this relational freedom is God sovereign, almighty and the Lord of all.’ (p71-72)

[12] “In God’s own freedom there is encounter and communion; there is order and, consequently, dominion and subordination; there is majesty and humility, absolute authority and absolute obedience; there is offer and response.” Karl Barth, The Humanity of God, Collins, London, 1961, p71

[13] We take this to be the New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:2), the city with foundations whose Maker and Builder is God (Hebrews 11:10).

[14] A favourite designation in Galatians – 1:16; 2:20; 4:4; 4:6. See also ‘Seed’ (3:16)

[15] Gal 1:3; 5:10; 6:14; 6:18

[16] Gal 4:4

[17] Gal 1:4; 2:20, 21; 3:1, 13; 4:5; 5:11; 6:12; 6:14

[18] Christ had just one potential path according to the argument of Gal 2:21. There is no possibility in Paul’s mind of Christ dying for nothing, nor could righteousness have come another way (3:21). Thus the road to Golgotha was the only way for Christ (cf Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33; 14:36). Again, we must ask – if this is how our Lord expresses His freedom, do we dare ask for more ‘freedom’? What definition of freedom would we use which demoted our Lord beneath our own exalted station!?

[19] This is the tendency of 16^th century exposition of Galatians (of course Luther primarily) – imagining that ‘the circumcision’ were simple equivalents of Pelagius or Erasmus.

[20] ‘Far from the main issue of this document being ‘how may one be saved’ (by grace rather than works) Paul is concerned with telling those already saved how they can avoid becoming lost or even apostate. Getting out, not getting in is the concern, hence all the language about curses, casting out intruders, being bewitched and the like. The Galatians are indeed testing the boundaries, but from the inside out, not the outside in. Nevertheless, confusion about boundaries in general and rites of passage in particular requires of Paul that he explain (1) how entrance was achieved to the community; (2) what the rite of passage was (cf. Gal 3.28); (3) what the implications are of the means of entrance and maintenance; (4) why other boundary and maintenance rituals are not required; (5) what these other rites signify and commit the initiates to.’ Ben Witherington, Grace in Galatia, T&T Clark, 1998, 1:6.

[21] E.g. Gal 3:1-5; 4:12-20

[22] E.g Gal 1:6-9; 4:9; 5:2-4, 12, 15; 6:7-8

[23] While th/j peritomh/j can have a benign meaning – the Jews (e.g. 2:7,8) – it can also represent a dangerous enemy of the gospel (e.g. 2:12; cf Eph 2:11; Col 4:11; Tit 1:10)

[24] Barrett is probably right to link the circumcision with Jerusalem and with James himself (at least indirectly): “In 1:6-8 we hear of ‘those who are troubling you’, by seeking your attachment to a different gospel, different from mine – only it is in fact no gospel, no good news at all. At 5:12 we hear of those [plural] ‘who are upsetting you’ and at 5:10 of ‘he’ [singular] ‘who is troubling you.’ In 6:12,13 it becomes clear that though other matters are involved (4:10) circumcision is at the heart of the dispute.’ (C.K. Barrett, Freedom and Obligation, SPCK, 1985, p14). Thus, there is a party with a ring-leader. This party corresponds in its interests with the false brothers (2:4). It is likely that the group sent from James is to be linked to them (cf 2:12)

[25] Gal 1:6-9

[26] C.K. Barrett, Freedom and Obligation, SPCK, 1985, p15

[27] Gal 1:6-9; 2:5; 2:11,14-21; 3:1; 4:12,19-20; 5:1-12; 6:7-8

[28] Gal 1:7; 5:2-4

[29] For a closer following of Paul’s argument, see the appendix

[30] See for e.g., 2:15-21; 3:26; 4:8-10; 5:2-5

[31] Gal 1:4; 2:20, 21; 3:1; 5:11; 6:12; 6:14

[32] Gal 2:21

[33] Rather He gave Himself for our sins, rescuing us from this present evil age. Gal 1:4

[34] The cross, was not simply the death of the Son of God ‘for me’ (2:20), but the death of my old self (2:20) and the death of any chance that flesh could approach God.(6:14)

[35] Gal 3:13; 4:5

[36] Gal 3:23-25

[37] Gal 4:8-9

[38] Gal 3:2-5; 4:6; 5:25

[39] Gal 4:6

[40] Gal 5:16, 18, 25

[41] Luther’s comments on 3:6 are apt: “Some find fault with Paul for applying the term “faith” in Genesis 15:6 to Christ. They think Paul’s use of the term too wide and general. They think its meaning should be restricted to the context. They claim Abraham’s faith had no more in it than a belief in the promise of God that he should have seed.

We reply: Faith presupposes the assurance of God’s mercy. This assurance takes in the confidence that our sins are forgiven for Christ’s sake. Never will the conscience trust in God unless it can be sure of God’s mercy and promises in Christ. Now all the promises of God lead back to the first promise concerning Christ: “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” The faith of the fathers in the Old Testament era, and our faith in the New Testament are one and the same faith in Christ Jesus, although times and conditions may differ. Peter acknowledged this in the words: “Which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they” (Acts 15: 10, 11). And Paul writes: “And did all drink the spiritual drink; for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ” (I Cor. 10:4). And Christ Himself declared: “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it and was glad” (John 8:56). The faith of the fathers was directed at the Christ who was to come, while ours rests in the Christ who has come. Time does not change the object of true faith, or the Holy Spirit. There has always been and always will be one mind, one impression, one faith concerning Christ among true believers whether they live in times past, now, or in times to come. We too believe in the Christ to come as the fathers did in the Old Testament, for we look for Christ to come again on the last day to judge the quick and the dead.” (3:6)

[42] Gal 1:4

[43] Gal 4:5

[44] Gal 3:13

[45] Gal 5:24

[46] Gal 6:14

[47] Gal 3:26-29

[48] Here we see how Solus Christus is inextricably linked to sola gratia and sola fides

[49] Luther makes much of this point both in his commentary and in The Freedom of the Christian. E.g. “[Judaizers] break the very first commandment of God by denying His promise in Christ. They do not worship God in faith. They worship themselves…Those who intend to obtain righteousness by their own efforts do not say in so many words: “I am God; I am Christ.” But it amounts to that. They usurp the divinity and office of Christ. The effect is the same as if they said, “I am Christ; I am a Savior. I save myself and others.” (Galatians, under 3:10); “Without the doctrine of justification there can be only ignorance of God. Those who refuse to be justified by Christ are idolaters. They remain under the Law, sin, death, and the power of the devil. Everything they do is wrong. (Galatians, under 4:9); “Any worship of God, any religion without Christ is idolatry. In Christ alone is God well pleased.” (Galatians, under 4:9)

[50] We give the power of God to whatever we worship. This is precisely the point of 4:8-9. Apart from Christ we know nothing of God. In such a state we are not free but slaves to the elemental spirits of this world.

[51] Gal 4:3, 9; Col 2:8, 20; (Heb 5:12), 2 Pet 3:10,12

[52]

[53] The American Declaration of Independence (1776) found it ‘self-evident’ that man is born with an ‘inalienable’ right to Liberty. Even more striking was the belief of the French Revolution that man is [in fact] born free. Rousseau’s rejoinder, ‘but everywhere he is in chains’, captures far better the evidence we see all around us.

[54] Gal 4:8

[55] Gal 4:3

[56] Gal 3:13; 4:5. If a slave is redeemed from his master by a great payment, is he free? In one sense, absolutely! And the bigger the payment, the deeper the slavery, the greater the sense of liberation. Yet in another sense, is the slave his own? No, he’s been bought at a price. And in the gospel we have been bought at such a price – the infinitely precious blood of Christ. We are purchased from slavery to belong to Him. Then has Paul misrepresented the situation in Gal 5:1 by saying ‘It is for freedom Christ has set us free?’ Surely he should say ‘for lifelong servitude, Christ has set us free.’ But no – belonging to Christ, being led by the Spirit is perfect freedom. Our freedom does not depend on not serving anyone. Our freedom depends on Whom we serve!

[57] Gal 4:6

[58] Gal 3:16

[59] Gal 3:29

[60] “God bound and committed Himself to man, making Himself in His Son a man of Israel and the brother of all men… If this is true, if this is not an accidental historical fact but in its historical uniqueness is the revelation of the divine will, valid and powerful before, above, after, and in all history, then God’s freedom is essentially not freedom from, but freedom to and for.” Karl Barth, The Humanity of God, Collins, London, 1961, p71

[61] While we note positive insights from the ‘New Perspective’ such as the call to rightly perceive the social and ethnic unity demands of Paul, we are not convinced that ‘works of Law’ refer simply to boundary markers between Jew and Gentile. While the table-fellowship issue is the presenting one in Gal 2:11-13, Paul sees this as symptomatic of a deeper failure to grasp ‘the truth of the Gospel’ (2:14). His argument in v15-16 goes back to first principles, i.e. how a person is saved. The table fellowship issue is simply an outworking of the radical doctrine of grace which Paul unpacks in the course of the letter. It should be noted that Christ redeems us, not simply from ‘works of Law’ but from ‘the Law’ itself (e.g. Gal 4:5; Rom 7:6). It is not simply the boundary markers which need to be re-thought!

[62] Gal 1:4; Gal 4:5; Gal 3:13; Gal 5:24; Gal 6:14

[63] Cf. Gal 5:3 – the Law demands to be taken as a whole and refuses the piecemeal solution of both the three-fold classification of Aquinas and the Reformers and the ‘boundary markers’ solution of the ‘New Perspective.’

[64] See appendix, under chapter 3 for a brief discussion of the purpose of Law

[65] See for e.g., Gal 3:6,12,13; 4:21-31

[66] Our comprehensive transference from the old creation is captured so well in 6:15:

Neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but new creation (kainh. kti,sij).

We may have expected Paul to round off his letter with a ‘don’t circumcise’ sermonette. Yet, of course, to do that would be to fall for the same legalism which he is opposing. No law can redeem us from law, nothing of the flesh can wage war against flesh. Instead the Creator God has redeemed us to a new order of existence – beyond sin, death, law and wrath. Humanity does not need a new and better law – it needs resurrection. The Christian is one who has been raised to a new realm – the realm of the Spirit which is the realm of the future, the realm of inheritance and promise, of the Jerusalem above which is free.

[67] E.g. Gal 3:1-5; 5:25

[68] Gal 5:13

[69] Gal 6:2

[70] Gal 1:4

[71] Gal 4:4

[72] Gal 5:5

[73] Gal 2:15-16

[74] Gal 6:9

[75] Gal 6:15

[76] Gal 5:13-26

[77] Gal 2:20

[78] Gal 5:16

[79] Gal 5:18

[80] Gal 6:8

[81] Gal 5:13

[82] Gal 5:16

[83] Gal 5:24

[84] Gal 6:8

[85] It is striking to see how seriously Paul takes the freedom of the Galatians who have perverted it so badly. He does not snatch it away from them and erect a legal ‘guardian’ for them until they learn their lesson. He argues on the basis that they already have it (e.g. Gal 3:1-5; 5:24-26; 5:10) and exhorts them to take it more seriously, not less.

[86] Gal 1:6-7

[87] i.e. this kind of flesh – pre-resurrection flesh

[88] Gal 4:19

[89] Luther, Galatians, under 5:1

[90] Thus, again, we note the radical difference between the world’s conception of freedom and Paul’s. The world considers possibilities as the yardstick of freedom – the more we have, the more free we are. Paul considers our freedom in terms of a new and true necessity – loving service in the Spirit. “[Christian freedom is] our deliverance from the ocean of unlimited possibilities by transference to the rock of the one necessity which as such is [the] only possibility.’ (K. Barth, CD IV/3, 665) quoted in John Webster, Barth’s Moral Theology, T&T Clark, 1998, p111.

[91] NB: This is an outline of the argument, not the Epistle!

[92] Of course because we are constituted as Christians through faith in Christ – the fullness of Christian living is to be had through faith in Christ. And not, therefore, by adding legal requirements.

[93] The promise of Whom predated the Law by millennia! (Gen 3:15)

[94] The allegory of Hagar and Sarah at the end of chapter 4 again shows Paul’s desire to prove from the Law that the Law points away from itself and to faith in Christ.