1. Standard membersonshiponline
    the corrected one.
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    8668
    19 May '16 16:38
    We may think that faithful following of Christians to a teacher is a sign of his approval from God. Not necessarily so. An entire region that the Apostle Paul labored over , the churches in Galatia turned against him.

    "We don't want to follow your teaching Paul" is essentially what they said. The letter of Galatians reveals what was the controversy between these churches which Paul raised up and Paul.

    God saw it profitable to record something of this falling out between Christian converts and the author of 13 some New Testament books, the Apostle Paul.

    Why did they not want to follow Paul's teaching any longer ?
  2. Standard membersonshiponline
    the corrected one.
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    8668
    19 May '16 17:151 edit
    "Paul, you are not even a real apostle. We have had some REAL teachers sent by God to us. You're out of a job Paul. We won't follow your kind of instruction any more."

    This is what a region basically said to Paul. It appears as if Paul is a failure as a Christian worker.

    Why did they not want to follow Paul's teaching anymore?

    He starts his letter this way:

    " Paul, an apostle (not from men nor through man but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead)

    And all the brothers who are with me, to the churches of Galatia." (Gal. 1:1,2)



    The churches of Galatia were more than one local church meaning more than one city. A bunch of them turned away from Paul.

    We should however not think of Paul as a lone ranger type of worker. He was not individualistic. He worked with co-workers as a team. That is why he does not fail to mention - " and all the brothers who are with me ..." .

    The Apostle Paul was the greatest team player. He may have been the most gifted among them. But he was not isolated or individualistic in his labors - "all the brothers who are with me".

    These Galatian churches rejected Paul and those on his team co-working along with him.
  3. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    A Spirited Misfit
    in London
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    8578
    19 May '16 18:13
    Originally posted by sonship
    We may think that faithful following of Christians to a teacher is a sign of his approval from God. Not necessarily so. An entire region that the Apostle Paul labored over , [b]the churches in Galatia turned against him.

    "We don't want to follow your teaching Paul" is essentially what they said. The letter of Galatians reveals what was the ...[text shortened]... tament books, the Apostle Paul.

    Why did they not want to follow Paul's teaching any longer ?[/b]
    'Why did they not want to follow Paul's teaching any longer?'

    Perhaps it is because Paul commanded his followers to consider "accursed" anyone who preaches a different gospel than his. (Galatians 1:8,9).

    'It is obvious to anyone reading the book of Galatians that Paul was demanding the Galatian church follow no one but him, not even the original apostles back in Jerusalem.'

    judaismvschristianity.com/paulthe.htm
  4. Standard membersonshiponline
    the corrected one.
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    8668
    19 May '16 20:361 edit
    Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
    Perhaps it is because Paul commanded his followers to consider "accursed" anyone who preaches a different gospel than his. (Galatians 1:8,9).


    Here's the reference:

    "But if we or an angel out of heaven should announce to you a gospel beyind that which we have annoinced to you, let him be accursed.

    As we have said before; now also I say again, If anyone announces to you a gospel beyond that which you have received, let him he accursed."


    Notice that he includes himself and his co-workers -

    "But if even we ... should announce to you a gospel beyond that which we have annouinced to you, let him be accursed."


    In other words if even he should change his own mind in the future and announce another Gospel, he is to be accursed.

    In other words if any of his team of Christian workers should change and deviate from what they formerly announced as the Gospel, they are to be accursed.

    There is in this tone no favoritism as you imply. The truth is the truth. And even if PAUL HIMSELF should deviate from that truth he is to be blamed and counted as accursed.

    "Do not be deceived by me - Paul, or by any of my colleagues, or even by an angel from heaven." That's the tone rather than an autocratic self vindicating selfish demagogue.


    'It is obvious to anyone reading the book of Galatians that Paul was demanding the Galatian church follow no one but him, not even the original apostles back in Jerusalem.'


    No it is not obvious as I pointed out above. His concern is not personal. His concern is for the truth.

    "But if even we ..."
  5. Standard membersonshiponline
    the corrected one.
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    8668
    19 May '16 20:372 edits
    Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
    Furthermore no could have been more of an enemy of the Gospel as he could have been. He already knows what it is to hate the truth and oppose it to the death.

    "For you have heard of my manner of life formerly in Judaism, that I persecuted the church of God excessively and ravaged it." (v.13)


    He is reminding them that he already knows by extensive experience what it is to be contrary to the Gospel. He was a man absolute to attack the Christian teaching. And he turned into man absolute to confirm the Christian teaching.

    What is more going on in this letter is that Paul be forced to defend his apostleship some because he was not one of the original twelve apostles. But in doing this he does not suggest that Peter, John, or James taught wrongly.

    Granted, he does say that these "pillars" didn't do much to add to his revelation. He was a scholar to them. And he had a personal encounter with the resurrected and glorified Christ. Yet he had the humility to go up and check his understanding of the Gospel message with these three "pillars" of the church in Jerusalem.

    Saying that they added nothing to him is just his frankness. It is not bragging.

    In the end of the letter Paul strongly implies that the changed lives that have happened to the believers is the only thing that really counts. That they are a new creation, transformed, and their living is effected - that is the only vindication of the Gospel that is really important.

    "For neither is circumcision anything nor uncircumcision, but a new creation is what matters . " (Gal. 6:16)


    What Paul ministered was changing their lives. And it is that for which he was jealous and fighting. Personal aggrandizement was not his uppermost concern.
  6. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    19 May '16 21:212 edits
    Originally posted by sonship
    We may think that faithful following of Christians to a teacher is a sign of his approval from God. Not necessarily so. An entire region that the Apostle Paul labored over , [b]the churches in Galatia turned against him.

    "We don't want to follow your teaching Paul" is essentially what they said. The letter of Galatians reveals what was the ...[text shortened]... tament books, the Apostle Paul.

    Why did they not want to follow Paul's teaching any longer ?[/b]
    Your statement is not very accurate. They did not turn away from Paul, they were having their faith subverted by

    1. those who called Pauls apostleship into question
    2. Judaizers who were advocating adherence to the Law (circumcision etc) as an essential part of Christianity
    3. Those who were advocating justification through works, not in faith of Jesus Christ.
  7. Standard membersonshiponline
    the corrected one.
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    8668
    19 May '16 22:102 edits
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Your statement is not very accurate. They did not turn away from Paul, they were having their faith subverted by

    1. those who called Pauls apostleship into question
    2. Judaizers who were advocating adherence to the Law (circumcision etc) as an essential part of Christianity
    3. Those who were advocating justification through works, not in faith of Jesus Christ.
    1. those who called Pauls apostleship into question


    Did such question encourage or discourage the Galatian churches to follow Paul's teaching ?

    It discouraged the Galatian churches from following Paul and his co-workers.


    2. Judaizers who were advocating adherence to the Law (circumcision etc) as an essential part of Christianity


    Did such advocacy encourage or discourage the Galatian churches from following Paul's teaching ?

    It discouraged them from following Paul and his co-workers.
    At best it caused them to pervert their understanding of what he has been teaching them.


    3. Those who were advocating justification through works, not in faith of Jesus Christ.


    Did such advocacy encourage or discourage them from following Paul's teaching ?

    It discouraged them from listening to Paul. So he says that they were bewitched.

    " O foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was openly portrayed crucified?" (Gal. 3:1)


    But it is not just a matter of initial salvation. The Galatians were being troubled by false teaching concerning their continuing on in the Christian life. That is why he says that they WERE running well before this deception came in.

    " You were running well. Who hindered you that you would not believe and obey the truth ? " (5:7)


    It was a matter of them turning away from Paul's minstry. He reminds them that he preached the gospel there and founded the churches there. And He considered himself as a laboring mother bringing them to birth spiritually.

    " My children, with whom I travail in again in birth until Christ be formed in you." (4:19)


    He is perplexed about their new attitude of negativism toward him. He wonders why he has now become their enemy.

    "So then have I become your enemy by presenting the truth to you ? " (4:16)
  8. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    20 May '16 07:022 edits
    Originally posted by sonship
    yes these things were a source of discouragement but the entire region did not turn against him as you have rather sensationally stated. Please try to be more careful in future, remember you are a swordsman 'holding the word of truth aright'.
  9. Standard membersonshiponline
    the corrected one.
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    8668
    20 May '16 11:164 edits
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    yes these things were a source of discouragement but the entire region did not turn against him as you have rather sensationally stated. Please try to be more careful in future, remember you are a swordsman 'holding the word of truth aright'.
    The letter was concerned with multiple churches in the region of Galatia, an extensive widespread problem.

    Churches were established by city. That is the apostolic way was one city matched with one church. Where one city is mentioned the church is mentioned in the singular tense always in the New Testament under careful examination.

    Areas larger than a city were either countries or districts or provinces. Since Galatia was a province it contained more than one city.

    IE. The churches [plural] in Judea - ( 1 Thess. 2:14)
    The churches [plural] in Asia - (1 Cor. 16:19).
    The seven churches [plural] in - Asia again (Revelation 1:11)
    The churches [plural] in Galatia - ( 1 Cor. 16:1)


    And therefore it contained more than one local church. So the letter is addressed not to "the church in Galatia" but "to the churches [plural] in Galatia".

    "Paul, an apostle ... And all the brothers who are with me, to the churches [plural] in Galatia." (vs.1,2)


    Apparently, as far as we can tell, the churches in the whole region of Galatia were having the problem. The letter is at least addressed to all the churches in that region.

    The problem the letter deals with concerns for the whole region in which those churches were established. So I don't think it was sensational to say the entire region turned away. But if it was know that it was possible for the Apostle Paul to regret to Timothy that a whole region could turn away from him in some sense -

    " This you know, that all who are in Asia turned away from me, of whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes." ( 2 Timothy 1:15)


    We cannot tell if this means every single Christian turned away from him, or every church or just all his co-workers in that region became sour. But he expressed his concern as "all who are in Asia turned away from me".

    Was he also being sensational ?
  10. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    20 May '16 12:483 edits
    Originally posted by sonship
    The letter was concerned with multiple churches in the region of Galatia, an extensive widespread problem.

    Churches were established by city. That is the apostolic way was one city matched with one church. Where one city is mentioned the church is mentioned in the singular tense always in the New Testament under careful examination.

    Areas larger than ...[text shortened]... concern as [b]"all who are in Asia turned away from me"
    .

    Was he also being sensational ?[/b]
    Paul’s exclamation, “O senseless Galatians,” is not evidence that he had in mind all the congregations in the entire provence and everyone in them (Galatians 3:1) Rather, Paul was rebuking certain ones in the congregations there for allowing themselves to be influenced by an element of Judaizers among them, Jews who were attempting to establish their own righteousness through the Mosaic arrangement in place of the ‘righteousness due to faith’ provided by the new covenant. (Galatians: 2:15–3:14; 4:9, 10)

    Infact this is emphasised by your own text which mentions only two individuals directly by name, Phygelus and Hermogenes.

    Paul was not being sensationalistic but you certainly were.
  11. Standard membersonshiponline
    the corrected one.
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    8668
    20 May '16 15:421 edit
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Paul’s exclamation, “O senseless Galatians,” is not evidence that he had in mind all the congregations in the entire provence and everyone in them (Galatians 3:1) Rather, Paul was rebuking certain ones in the congregations there for allowing themselves to be influenced by an element of Judaizers among them, Jews who were attempting to establish their ...[text shortened]... by name, Phygelus and Hermogenes.

    Paul was not being sensationalistic but you certainly were.
    You're making a mountain out of a mole hill.

    All those in Asia - "of whom are ..." . Probably he is just singling OUT two in particular. They may have been the ringleaders.

    Its a minor point and the sensationalism appears to be your flattery and your harping on this minor point.

    Okay, some believers may have been exempt from the turning away.
    I hope so.
    Fine.
  12. Standard membersonshiponline
    the corrected one.
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    8668
    27 May '16 14:142 edits
    In Galatians the legal Judaizers hated to see any Christian not in fear and bondage to themselves.

    It made them miserable that Christians were not in bondage. They frequented churches to spy out if the believers were free from their kind of legalistic bondage. They sought immediately to induce fear and bondage in opposition to them enjoying the dynamic grace of the Spirit.

    " ... because of false brothers, brought in secretly, who stole in to spy out our freedom which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage." (Gal. 2:4)

    These people looked around and asked "Hmmm. How much freedom do these Christians have ? They ought not be so free. They ought to be fearful of our teaching. We must immediately bring them under our kind of bondage."

    Paul and his co-workers would not subject themselves to them. And not because of pride but because the truth of the Gospel was at stake.

    "To them we yielded with the subjection demanded not even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might remain with you." (Gal. 2:5)
Back to Top