COMMENTARY ON GALATIANS

LESSON NUMBER 13

^{Gal 2:3} “But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: ⁴And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: ⁵To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Galatians 2:3-5

PAUL DID NOT YIELD TO PRESSURE

INTRODUCTION

              Paul is dealing with churches who have willingly subjected themselves to erroneous teaching. They should have recognized it as false, because it contradicted that they had heard from Paul, who received his Gospel directly from Christ. That very circumstance required that every representation of the Gospel be compared with what Paul preached, for Jesus considered him to be “faithful” (1 Tim 1:12). Paul’s word was not to be compared with what they had been hearing. Oh, the blessedness of being able to recognize what is really the truth, then comparing every other message with it. Paul will now show that he also confronted contradicting teachings, as well as those who sought to bind them upon him. However, unlike the Galatians, he did not yield to their demands, nor was he tolerant of what they said. There is an aggressiveness to faith that those not possessing it cannot know. Fighting the good fight of faith presumes the presence of faith. The Galatians were not doing good fighting the good fight because their faith had been impacted by erroneous teaching. Faith cannot be sustained by lies and misrepresentations, just as it cannot come through such means. When men deliver a false message, it may be embellished with all manner of impressive words and references to Jesus and His love. However such a message is spiritually impotent, and that status cannot be changed by shouts, signs, and claims of insight. I do not believe this is generally known, for there is entirely too much tolerance of religious error in the Christian community. This text will show how wrong such tolerance really is. When it comes to encroachments on the faith of God’s people, kindness, soft words, and a submissive spirit are not in order. When believers are under attack, it is time for casting down, rebuking, fighting, and wrestling. When Satan, working through men, attempts to take our faith, believers must take their stand and fight.

 TITUS WAS NOT COMPELLED TO BE CIRCUMCISED

                ^{Gal 2:3} “But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.”

              The spiritual genius with which Paul approaches the Galatian churches is most arresting to consider. They had yielded to the pressure of Judaistic teachers. Whatever reasons they may have adduced for their decision to yield to these teachers was totally unacceptable. This is because they had heard the truth of the Gospel, which was thoroughly capable of grounding them and causing them to bring forth God-glorifying and personally satisfying fruit. Anyone who has heard the real Gospel has the advantage. This is because the Gospel of Christ “IS the power of God unto salvation” (Rom 1:16). With it comes all of the advantages required for stability, growth, and fruitfulness. Of course, where the true Gospel is not presented, none of these advantages are present. You cannot have the power of the Gospel unless the Gospel itself has been declared and expounded. As rudimentary as that may seem, it is hardly known in this day.

              Paul will now show how he had been subjected to the pressure of other teaching, yet did not yield to it. He stood firm because he had “the faith of the Gospel,” or the faith that is generated and maintained by means of the Gospel (Phil 1:27). He would have preferred to cite the Galatians as an example of standing firm, as he did the Roman brethren (Rom 1:8), the Ephesian brethren (Eph 1;15), the Philippian brethren (Phil 1:5), the Colossian brethren (Col 1:4), and the Thessalonian brethren (1 Thess 1:8; 2 Thess 1:3). But, alas, he was not able to do this. Therefore, he sets himself forth as an example of the kind of consistency that is produced by actually embracing the Gospel of Christ.

              TITUS, WHO WAS WITH ME. When Paul met with the brethren in Jerusalem, he took Titus with him. This was for the good of Titus himself, the comfort of Paul, and a testimony to the Jerusalem brethren as well. This is what can be done with a “living epistle” (2 Cor 3:3). A person whose life is being lived in contradiction of the truth is not a living letter. Such a person is not evidence of the reality of salvation, the greatness of grace, or the will of God. Such people are a reproach to Christ, and give occasion for the world to doubt the legitimacy and effectiveness of the salvation of God. Titus was a person who had comforted Paul (2 Cor 7:6). He was a young man whose heart could be touched by the spiritual recovery of others (2 Cor 7:13). He had a pure heart, into which the Lord could put an “earnest care” for the brethren (2 Cor 8:16). He was Paul’s “partner and fellowhelper,” entering into the work with him (2 Cor 8:23).

              BEING A GREEK. As used here, the word “Greek,” is equivalent to the word “Gentile.” “Gentile” accents the none Jew from the standpoint of national distinction. “Greek” places the emphasis upon the difference from the standpoint of language, for Greek was the universal language at that time. The comparison would be between “the Hebrew tongue” (Acts 21:40), or “Jews language” (2 Kgs 18:26), and the language of the rest of the world. It ought to be noted that the prophets related a “pure language” to the restoration of the people of God (Zeph 3:9).

              Since the matter being discussed was the relevance of circumcision to salvation, Paul wisely brings some fruit from among the Gentiles that will confirm that there is no diminishment of the salvation of God because one is not circumcised. Titus was living proof of the falsity of the doctrine that taught the necessity of being circumcised after the manner of Moses. Circumcision was a fleshly sign of a covenantal relationship with God. The evidence of the love of the truth and a truly godly life are the evidence of the circumcision of the heart. The lack of these indicators in Christ is as serious as the lack of circumcision under the Old Covenant.

              HE WAS NOT COMPELLED TO BE CIRCUMCISED. Other versions read, “not even Titus . . . was compelled,” ^NKJV “was [not] compelled to undergo circumcision,” ^ASV “was not forced to be circumcised,” ^ESV and “even Titus, who was with me, was not compelled [as some had anticipated] to be circumcised.” ^AMPLIFIED

              The Galatian epistle contains no less than twelve references to circumcision (2:3,7,8,9,12; 5:22,3,6,11; 6:12,13,15). These brethren had succumbed to the pressure of false teachers to be circumcised. Though Gentiles, their thinking had been altered on this subject, even though they had been subjected to “the truth of the Gospel” (Gal 2:5,14).

              And what was the difference between them and Titus, who was NOT compelled to be circumcised? That is what Paul will now expound. He will trace the inability of the proponents of circumcision to bind their views upon Titus. He will also identify the seriousness of such attempts. He will not speak kindly of those who pressed the matter of circumcision upon others, erroneously relating it to the salvation of God and the New Covenant.

              All, of this postulated a working knowledge of the Scriptures – else circumcision would be a totally foreign subject, just as it is among most modern-day Christians. This is not a matter of one skillful speaker out-talking another. It is rather that some had taken hold of the truth of the Gospel, while others had not. Some had seen the uniqueness of the Gospel, and others had not. Some grasped the nature of the New Covenant, and others did not.

FALSE BRETHREN AND SPIRITUAL SPYING

               ^2:4 “And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage.”

              This account confirms the seriousness of opposing doctrines, and persuasions that are not in strict keeping with the truth of God. Here the issue is liberty or bondage. Because of this, those who sought to dissuade the people of God from the truth are viewed as spies with ignoble motives, who are working against what is announced and maintained by the Gospel.

              FALSE BRETHREN. Other versions read, “false believers,” ^NRSV “pretended to be brothers,” ^CJB “false Christians,” ^GWN and “so-called Christians there-- false ones, really.” ^NLT

              The expression “false brethren” is translated from a single Greek word that means, “one who ostentatiously professes to be a Christian, but is destitute of Christian knowledge and piety,” ^THAYER “false brother, i.e. a Christian in name only,” ^FRIBERG “one who pretends to be a believer,” ^UBS and “false brother, untrue friend.” ^GINGRICH Just as there are “false apostles” (2 Cor 11:13), “false prophets” (1 John 4:1), and “false Christs” (Matt 24:24), so there are “false brethren” – people who are not what they represent themselves to be.

              Paul referred to such people in the listing of the perils to which he was subjected during his ministry: “in perils among false brethren” (2 Cor 11:26). There is, then, a certain danger in even being around such people. There must also be some valid means through which such dangerous people can be detected, else there would be no point to these words. Paul will trace the matter down to a fundamental ignorance of the nature of the Gospel and the New Covenant.

              BROUGHT IN UNAWARES. Other versions read, “secretly brought in,” ^NKJV “sneaked in,” ^NASB ‘Infiltrated our ranks,” ^NIV “slipped in,” ^NRSV “”let in secretly,” ^BBE “smuggled in,” ^CSB “brought in surreptitiously,” ^DARBY “craftily sent in,” ^GENEVA and “secretly smuggled in [to the Christian brotherhood].” ^AMPLIFIED The very language is strange to those enamored of the American church. Yet, this kind of devilish approach is still being attempted by those who are closer to this world than they are to God, and whose interests are immersed in human tradition rather than truth.

              Craftily, some people identified with the Jerusalem church actually sought to promote their own agenda by bringing in some “false brethren” – people who were identified as Christians, yet who were not really believers. The very fact that such a distinction is being made indicates that there are means through which “false brethren” can be detected. Those means center in the Gospel of Christ, the nature of salvation, and the uniqueness of the New Covenant. Where these are basically unknown, I do not know that it is possible to discover “false brethren.” If one imagines this could be accomplished by a special revelation from God, it would have to be established that God gives such revelations to those who have ignored His Gospel.

              TO SPY OUT OUR LIBERTY. Other versions read, “spy on the freedom we have,” ^NIV “searching out our free condition,” ^BBE “learn about the freedom Christ Jesus gives us,” ^GWN and “to take away the freedom.” ^NLT Those who are in bondage to Law cannot imagine a person being free to serve God, resist the devil, and grow up into Christ in all things. To them, such a condition defies all logic. They see Christians as fundamentally wayward, and cannot even conceive of a new heart and a new spirit, or being willing in the day of His power.

              We ourselves have experienced such intrusions – people who came to find out what we were teaching. They had no genuine interest in the truth itself, but rather sought to classify us with either being for them of against them – being of their group or contrary to it. However, this is not a valid way of testing. The comparison must always be with the truth itself – independent of any purely human view of that truth, or any institution created by men.

              THAT THEY MIGHT BRING US INTO BONDAGE. Other versions read, “make us slaves,” ^NIV “might enslave us,” ^NRSV “make servants of us,” ^BBE “bring us into servitude,” ^DOUAY “to control us,” ^GWN “bring me under subjection,” ^MRD “force us to follow their Jewish regulations,” ^NLT and “might again bring us into bondage [under the Law of Moses].” ^AMPLIFIED

              Actually, these pretenders had come to perceive anything as false that contradicted their corrupted views. They were not only set to resist such things, but to bind their erroneous conclusions upon those who were gathered together. When the Son makes you “free indeed” (John 8:36), it creates a circumstance with which legalists are not comfortable. For them, freedom equates to license, for they cannot conceive of a heart that is eager to draw near to the Lord, walk in His ways, and serve Him. Such conditions contradict their own manners, so they are incapable of perceiving the truth of them.

              To be freed from the yoke of ceremonialism is wonderful! Peter affirmed we have been “redeemed . . . from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers.” ^NASB (1 Pet 1:18). We have been liberated from the bondage of serving God against our will, dwelling at a distance from Him, and seeking to make up for that distance by subscribing to rules and regulations. These “false brethren” were seeking to force them into that manner of life once again.

IN THE INTEREST OF TRUTH WE DID NOT GIVE PLACE

               ^2:5 “To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.”

              Paul and those with him stood together – “we.” Perhaps if these “false brethren” would have confronted Titus by himself, it would have been too difficult for him to bear. But, as an insightful leader, Paul stepped in and refused to let things go any further. In a sense, he transferred the weight of the responsibility to himself, taking care for the flock. Later, Titus would be able to handle such encroachments himself, as confirmed in Paul’s letter to him (Tit 1:13-14; 2:7-8,15; 3:10-11).

              GIVING PLACE BY SUBJECTION. Other versions read, “did not yield submission,” ^NKJV “did not yield in subjection,” ^NASB “did not give in to them,” ^NIV and “did not submit to them.” ^NRSV \          That is, they did not submit to their insistence that Titus be circumcised. On another occasion, probably after this event, Paul circumcised Timothy “because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek” (Acts 16:3). In this case “the Jews” were not believers, but those who had not yet turned to the Lord, yet were devoted to the will of the Lord as specified under the Law.

              What was the difference between these two accounts? First, unbelieving Jews were the subjects in the case of Timothy, and it was necessary that they see Paul as more than someone who opposed Jewish rites. Second, it was that coercion from “false brethren” was involved in the case of Titus, but not in the case of Timothy. Also, Timothy’s mother was a Jew, even though his father was a Greek. The circumcision of Timothy would confirm that Paul was not trying to uproot the Jews from their manners, but delivering a Gospel of freedom, which, once received, would enable the people to see why circumcision after the manner of Moses was not necessary, being replaced by a greater and more effective circumcision (Rom 2:29).

              A word ought to be said about accommodating ourselves to the traditions of men as embraced by professing Christians – sectarianism. In the case of the Jews, circumcision had been required by God under an inferior covenant. In the case of denominations, the traditions were instituted by men, not having their origin with God. That is a significant difference.

              NOT FOR AN HOUR. Other versions read, “for a moment,” ^NIV “for a minute,” ^CJB “for a single moment,” ^NLT and “not for the space of an hour.” ^TNT

              The idea here is that there was no negotiation, no extensive involvement in arguments – not even the slightest recognition that there was so much as a grain of truth in what the “false brethren” were saying. Their sincerity was not taken for granted. Whether or not they would be offended by rejecting their pleas for the circumcision of Titus did not enter into the matter. There was a total intolerance for what they were saying, and a steadfast refusal to do what they required.

              There were times when Paul said he “became as a Jew” that he might “gain the Jews” (1 Cor 9:20). However, he did not do this when “false brethren” were involved. There had to be some kind of evidence that the Jews were sincere, and living with a conscience toward the Lord, before Paul would conduct himself in such a manner. Those who use Paul’s words to justify looking like the world, and adopting questionable manners in order to reach them for Christ have only made their ignorance known. No such conduct is ever set before us in Scripture.

              THE CONTINUANCE OF THE TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL. Here was Paul’s motive for refusing to subject himself to the “false brethren” for even an hour. It is because such thoughtless conduct would have inhibited the Gospel. Thus we see that the truth of the Gospel is forfeited by the embrace of an inferior and false system of thought. Many of us have learned this by hard experience. Much of “the truth of the Gospel” that we have been able to perceive is directly owing to our separation from those who preached and promoted “another gospel.”

              By saying he took this action in order that the Galatians might continue to have the truth of the Gospel, Paul is confirming that the word of doctrinal compromise quickly spreads. Jesus Himself referred to the