The Bible NETWork ~ Impacting the World for Christ one post at a time!

On the face of it, it seems like the verses are saying contradictory things. On the one hand, if the Galatians receive circumcision, then on the authority of Paul, Christ will be of no benefit to them. On the other hand, he says just a few sentences later, that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, so how can something that means nothing have such a consequence? Not even to mention, what exactly is that consequence? That is, in what way or ways would Christ not benefit someone who still becomes circumcised despite Paul's letter?

As usual, I have some ideas about it. I post the question here, since I'm not interested in theoreticians who say that Paul's views on the Law are self-contradictory (Raisanen, and I think, Sanders.)

Thanks.

Robert Mounce (NIV Study, q.v.) has an interesting qualification for the Galatians 5:2 condition. He adds, ... as a condition for acceptance by God.

This brings an interesting semantic possibility forward. The "receiving" of circumcision that Paul is warning against may include even just the idea of conceiving it as a condition for acceptance by God.

Thus, is it possible to merely change one's views on circumcision, from it not being a condition for acceptance by God, to it being a condition, and the consequence is Christ is of no benefit to them? This makes the application far broader!

Clairbear

great illustration for the importance of context ... including following the writer's train of thought.

reading the letter as a whole it is quite obvious that Paul is speaking about attitudes of the heart ....

If the Galatians get circumcised in the belief that it is a necessary prerequisite for their salvation, then circumcision is worse than useless for them.

On the other hand, it is important to understand that it is circumcision of the heart that matters and this puts the physical act into perspective.

My take on it is ... that if circumcision is a used for cultural reasons (as Paul used it when he circumcised Timothy) ... or for health reasons (as in our culture) then it is ok. But it is never ok when it becomes necessary for salvation.
Which of course, opens up the can of worms about our own church rites and necessities.

_________________
Forum Code of Conduct
Forum Statement of Beliefs

Galatians 4:21-5:26

Hi Clair,

That really is a great question! As one who used to consider even the cults doctrine as being legitimately Christian, once I was told that one should never study "a verse" without seeing it in it's context. Something happened to the Bible I'd been carrying around. It was like someone had swapped it out and put another in it's place.

That was after I got saved! My salvation moment had a similar effect. Before I responded to the invitation that God had made that day, I could be seen carrying a bible around. It made for some interesting reading... I was drawn to the book of Proverbs, almost daily. The Lord used that to prepare me for his invitation.

so to the question... one cannot correctly understand the two verses in isolation. So I went back to the Gal 4:21 and continued on to Gal 5:26.

Textual context A real eye opener for those used to "cherry picking," verses that and use them to uphold some very, let's say, unhealthy conclusions.

Literary context, that is, what kind of writing is it? Historical narrative? Poetry? No. It was a letter.

1. Who?
2. What?
3. Where?
4. When?
5. How?

To whom was it written? The congregation of the church in Galatia.

What was happening? This early conflict came from Judaism. Judaizers were trying to reintroduce keeping the law as a way to salvation.

Where was this happening? Galatia (in Modern day Turkey), Damascus (Syria) in several places...

When was this happening? After the crucifixion (30AD), but before the fall of Jerusalem(70AD) scholars usually place the date of writing around 49-54AD

Why and How did this happen? They started to doubt Paul's authority and the gospel he preached and started listening to the cultists (Judaizers).

You see Clair, God never asked us for "blind faith," but rather a reasoned faith, based on sound history, grammar, and context.

That being the case, we were set free from the "works" salvation by what Christ did on our behalf. For us the law shows us how we may live, that is, in freedom. Freedom to live a life of goodness, freedom from fear, freedom from hell, freedom to serve others, and many other things as well.

_________________
MikeC1956
Asst Admin

know that your sin will find you out. Numbers 32:23b NET

Statement of beliefs
Code of Conduct
The Bible NETwork Blogs
The NeXt Bible Learning Environment
BeneSHOP: Help support Bible.org at no additional cost to you when you shop!

fides quarens intellectum, credo ut intelligam
faith seeking knowledge, believe to understand

all quotations are by bible translation indicated.

Hi Larry, nice to see you around!

Maybe this will shed some light on the issue:

Quote
Paul’s criticism of Israel is not that she is treating the law as a means of salvation or to earn merit, but as a charter of automatic national privilege. She is guilty of the idolatry of national privilege.6
http://www.the-highway.com/justification5_Eveson.html

_________________
Sam

All Scripture references from the NASB unless otherwise indicated.

The above is of course a scholar's critique of Wright.

Here's the scenario.

The NPP proponents think that Luther was wrong in reading Paul's attack on the Jews for “works righteousness”. Mainline churchleaders (Carson,etc.) comment that Paul was attacking something, what was it? (They also accused Sanders of not giving a complete picture of the religion of the Jews. Sanders replied that his intention was not theological, but historical. He had just picked up all the existing second Temple documentation).

The Galatian believers had converted from paganism to Christianty. Now they are under pressure from the Judaizers to adopt the Jewish rituals as well.

Two things:

Even before the Cross, the Jews had transformed the Law from a means to be a blessing to the world into a filter for excluding the other nations from being blessed. Bottom line, if one wanted to be blessed, one needed to become a Jew.

Second, after the Cross, when the Law had been rescued from the Jews and restored to its original purpose, the old rituals were no longer valid, especially in the form the Jews had maintained it, a worshipping of national identity.

Ironically, if the new converts knuckled down and accepted circumcision, they would be reverting to Paganism!

Please read the article “Paul and Qumran”, at the Wright website, for a more detailed explanation.

_________________
Sam

All Scripture references from the NASB unless otherwise indicated.

Now read this, also at the Paul Page website:

The Letter to the Galatians: Exegesis and Theology

(Originally published in Between Two Horizons: Spanning New Testament Studies and Systematic Theology Joel B. Green and Max Turner, eds., 2000, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 205–36. Reproduced by permission of the author.)

N. T. WRIGHT

Quote
And it is to this God alone that the Galatians must give full allegiance; otherwise they will slide back to a state similar to what they were in before. You must either have the triune God, Paul is saying, or you must have a form of paganism.

_________________
Sam

All Scripture references from the NASB unless otherwise indicated.