Download discussion questions: Galatians 2:3-14
Calvary Institute – Fall 2018 Index
Awkward, Controversial, Uncomfortable Situations
We began our time together with the following topic: Think of an awkward, controversial, or uncomfortable conversation you had recently. How did you handle it? What do you wish you would have done differently?
Without much delay, several people had examples, some recent events, some still lingering from the past.
- An unpleasant conversation with a friend that was easier to keep putting off.
- Shocked at harsh, unfair treatment by another church member. How do we respond in love when we are very angry?
- Being present in a group during a conflict between two people. Do we intervene? Do we maintain an embarrassed silence?
- Deciding whether to confront a person teaching distorted doctrine with the potential to lead other believers away from truth.
None of the situations was easy. All were uncomfortable, maybe even grievous. Some involved several other people. And each case was different, usually requiring on-the-spot thinking of how to respond (or how not to respond).
This week’s passage includes a significant conflict containing issues of doctrine, behavior, and relationships.
The Problem
In previous passages, Paul expressed his exasperation over the Galatian situation and his efforts to verify that his preaching conformed to the genuine apostolic gospel. However, up to this point he has not stated specifically what was wrong in the Galatian churches.
Now he provides more detail. “False brothers” (v. 4), the “circumcision party” (v. 12), were compromising “the truth of the gospel” (v. 5, 14). They imposed Jewish laws and customs on Gentile believers, attempting to “compel Gentiles to live like Jews” (v. 14). One person in our group pointed out that the question was not just the opinion of a few individuals but an intentional, organized movement, the “circumcision party” (v. 12).
Another member of our group raised the question of the identity of the “false brothers” – were they Jews trying to undermine the new Christian sect? Were they sincere believers who thought their Jewish background was the foundation for Christian behavior? Unfortunately, our discussion went in several different directions, and we never satisfactorily resolved this question. (That is the strength and the weakness of a discussion-oriented, Bible-based study. Not every issue can be decided or even thoroughly examined.)
The Response
Paul recognized that the question was not an optional choice depending on personal preferences. Instead, the “truth of the gospel” was at stake. Is salvation and a relationship with God based on grace? Or, as one group member expressed it, is salvation by grace plus “doing my part?” Paul’s response was driven by his desire to “preserve” the true gospel of grace for the Galatians (v. 5) as well as for us. He saw that there was no room for compromise or “giving up” (v. 5), even momentarily (v. 5). At stake is the freedom that is fundamental to the gospel (v. 4a) in contrast to the slavery under a religion of law (v. 4b).
Paul was confident after consulting the leaders of the apostolic church in Jerusalem. The leaders did not require his Greek (i.e., Gentile) companion, Titus, to undergo circumcision (v. 3). They acknowledged or affirmed that God’s grace was the source of Paul’s message (v. 9). Because Paul had the gospel right, nothing needed to be added to his message (v. 6). God was working equally in different messengers to different cultures but with the same message (v. 7-8). One comment in our group was that the apostles told Paul, “You’re good. Your message is the same as ours.”
One question from our group was about the change from “Cephas” (1:18) to “Peter” (2:7-8) and then back to “Cephas” (2:9, 11, 14). We considered a few possibilities, such as formal and informal names or personal and official names. One possibility is that Paul, in order to add even more credibility to his position, is quoting an official statement from the Jerusalem meeting (v. 9). That formal statement (if there was one) could have used the name Jesus had given him, “Peter” (Mark 3:16). The best answer is probably given by one of the commentators on Galatians regarding this question: “In this case we must be content simply to admit that we do not know why Paul would have changed names.”[1] (Another unanswered question this week!)
Ripple Effects
Even Peter, a “pillar” of the church (v. 9), changed his behavior. Someone mentioned that Peter had already seen the appropriate application of the gospel regarding “unclean” food (Acts 10:9-16) and “unclean” people (Acts 10:28). Even so, because of fear (Galatians 2:12), he compromised those convictions. One person pointed out that Peter had already been confronted in the past when other leaders “took issue with him” (Acts 11:2), so perhaps he was particularly sensitive to this issue. As another member commented, a person who was brought up his entire life immersed in the Jewish culture would have many issues that could pressure him to give in to the “circumcision party” (v. 12).
Paul saw how Peter’s actions affected many others. Along with other Jewish converts in the church at Antioch, even Paul’s companion Barnabas (v. 13) was in danger of deviating from the gospel (v. 14). Not only Peter and Barnabas but countless others, probably less mature believers, were at risk. Paul approached Peter directly, personally, “to his face” (v. 11). Rather than rumor or gossip or even a letter (or an email in our culture), Paul preferred a personal confrontation, even though that direct disagreement could be even more unpleasant. He also confronted Peter publicly, “in front of everyone” (v. 14). One observation was that the personal confrontation (v. 11) and the public confrontation (v. 14) might have been on two different occasions, conforming Paul’s action to Jesus’ instructions in Matthew 18.
Paul saw the two critical gospel-threatening aspects in the Galatian churches: He was concerned about the distortion of the heart of the gospel of grace. He also recognized the possible spread of a false understanding of the Christian life. The problem was not an academic, theological issue of doctrine. The “the freedom we have in Christ Jesus” (v. 4) was in jeopardy. Drastic conditions called for immediate action.
Understanding the faith and helping others understand it are part of becoming disciples who make disciples. Guarding our freedom in Christ and preserving the truth of the Gospel require Biblical knowledge through careful study of the Bible and theological understanding. For example, reviewing previous discussions of Spiritual Theology would suggest that the Galatians were confused about what God has done about our sin. The “false brothers” they were following were adding to what Christ has already done for us: “He introduced the New Covenant by which His people receive a new purity (forgiveness), a new identity (adoption), a new affection (desire) and a new power (capacity) by the Spirit of God … all we need to live and love like Jesus.” This is an example of how a theological framework can help us preserve “the truth of the gospel” against subtle error.
One member in our discussion pointed out the importance of tone of voice (of which we know nothing from the text of this passage). Perhaps Paul’s manner with Peter, even when he “opposed him to his face,” was conciliatory. Maybe the question in verse 14 was intended not to embarrass Peter but to gently help him see the inconsistency of his actions. Since we (at least I) typically read this passage as an awkward or even fractious confrontation, this was a refreshing alternative understanding. Paul was passionate about the purity of the gospel, but he could have approached Peter with the fruit of the Spirit he describes later in this letter.
Soul Care
Certainly in this situation Paul was not a poster-child for Soul Care. We discussed how he might have responded to the situation. How might Paul have used a Soul Care approach in this conflict? We reviewed a summary of Soul Care questions.
- Think Passion – What’s going on inside of me? Why am I so stressed about Peter’s behavior? Am I still worried if I really understand the gospel?
- Think Beneath – What’s going on inside of Peter? Why is he so stressed about the Jews seeing him eating with the Gentiles?
- Think Vision – How might Peter learn to understand self-obsession that drives his fear?
- Think Story – What parts of Peter’s life have shaped the passions that are controlling him?
- Think Movement – What would help Peter see the beauty of giving the gospel of grace priority over the opinions of the circumcision party?
(For an additional refresher on Soul Care, see the video course here.)
May we have Paul’s passion for the gospel as we study Scripture. May we grow in depth of understanding and theological insight. May we cultivate Soul Care to love others as Jesus did.
[1] Douglas J. Moo, Galatians, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2013), 140.