Galatians 5

[Storyteller]

Galatians 5:14 For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbour as yourself"

I am re reading Galatians 5, seems appropriate right now

My thinking is the message is personal and it says to me that each has their own path to God (through Christ). Originally I got sent this verse while thinking about Catholicism in the context of having to do certain thins to be considered a Catholic.

I want to understand this verse, discuss what it might or might not be saying.

I understand that we are not bound by the law, we are freed by grace, right?

[Nessa]

Kurieuo has written quite a few good posts that balance out truth with love.

Both are distorted if they dont have each other.

[bbyrd009]

ya, nice. well, you say "balance out truth with love," which love is truth, by the Book, but i understood you to say "law with love," which people kind of shy away from, but after all, we are to fulfill the law, in grace, and law is not nullified, anywhere. My current model is likened to a tree, that has a firm foundation, or root, in Law, the soil, the bedrock, perhaps, but fruits according to its kind, which i should not expect to be of the same variety as mine, nor would i want it to be.

The admonition to not be pulling up tares, so as not to ruin the wheat, also comes to mind here, why i am not quite sure.

[bbyrd009]

So, in relation to Galatians 5, it is easy to suggest that we are perhaps not bound by the law, and i completely agree, but in another context we also are not unbound from it, either. Once one has immersed themselves in the principles of the law--which, after all, are only very ancient and mutually agreed upon guidelines, meant to point to the need for grace--once law has been assimilated, iow, and one is rooted in the law, acting in grace should be possible without even referencing the law, as the limits of the law are really not even approached, and they are even superseded by a higher understanding, iow i might legally avail myself of "an eye for an eye," but even Muslims, supposedly living by this "law," recognize and appreciate forgiveness over the revenge-nature of availing oneself of "an eye for an eye" when they have been wronged.

So, i see that, generally speaking, they have largely assimilated grace much better than we have, which is really weird to me; as it seems few "Christians" would not avail themselves of every legal remedy when they have been wronged--again, generally speaking.

[crochet1949]

So, in relation to Galatians 5, it is easy to suggest that we are perhaps not bound by the law, and i completely agree, but in another context we also are not unbound from it, either. Once one has immersed themselves in the principles of the law--which, after all, are only very ancient and mutually agreed upon guidelines, meant to point to the need for grace--once law has been assimilated, iow, and one is rooted in the law, acting in grace should be possible without even referencing the law, as the limits of the law are really not even approached, and they are even superseded by a higher understanding, iow i might legally avail myself of "an eye for an eye," but even Muslims, supposedly living by this "law," recognize and appreciate forgiveness over the revenge-nature of availing oneself of "an eye for an eye" when they have been wronged.

So, i see that, generally speaking, they have largely assimilated grace much better than we have, which is really weird to me; as it seems few "Christians" would not avail themselves of every legal remedy when they have been wronged--again, generally speaking.

For one thing -- Why do you keep bringing Muslims into conversations.

Galations 5 starts out with "Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. We were given the Law as a way of Our seeing that we can't possibly keep all of it all the time. We can't possibly Ever be 'good enough' to save ourselves. God gave the Law to us through Moses -- all the laws of purification, All of it -- Chapters of it. Meant for the health and wellbeing of His chosen people. But - because of the cross -- God giving us grace -- unmerited favor -- we're no longer under the law. We have liberty through Christ. So - in the New Testament- we have 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind and being" And then Love your neighbor as yourself. God has put in the heart of believers To live those commandments -- Because we Love Him Because He first loved us. When we love someone, we have an inner desire To do good things with / for them.

[Jac3510]

We are in no sense under the law.

[crochet1949]

We are in no sense under the law.

Can't get your link to work.

[Jac3510]

Hmm. Maybe now as a direct attachment.

[RickD]

We are in no sense under the law.

Can't get your link to work.

Too bad, it's a really good article!

[crochet1949]

Hmm. Maybe now as a direct attachment.

I just tried That -- my husband was standing right here to see that I was doing the right 'thing' -- still nothing. It won't come through for me.

[crochet1949]

We are in no sense under the law.

Can't get your link to work.

Too bad, it's a really good article!

Maybe You know how to fix it so everyone 'here' Can read it

[RickD]

Your computer is probably blocking it.

[Jac3510]

Yes, you need to figure out why your computer is preventing you from downloading a standard pdf file. I'll post the relevant section here. Forgive me but I'm not going to take the time to do a lot of reformatting. This is mostly just a copy/paste, so there's no footnotes in this version (which is a shame, I think, because there's some really helpful information there, im(h)o . . .)

• THE LAW’S PLACE IN SANCTIFICATION IN GALATIANS
  
  One needs only a cursory reading of Galatians to recognize that Paul is attacking a heresy related to the keeping of the Law. Since Luther, it has been common to read Paul’s opponents as preaching justification by faith plus works. The discussion below, however, will argue that Paul is actually opposing the notion of sanctification by the Law. His opponents more likely saw themselves as completing Paul’s otherwise deficient Gospel. Yet it is apparent that Paul had come to believe that the Law had absolutely no place in the believer’s life—not for justification and also not for sanctification.
  
  Galatians 3:1-5
  
  The key passage of Galatians is 3:1-5. The first chapter introduces the basic problem, namely, that the Galatians were falling into a false Gospel (1:8-9). In the latter half of the first and the entire second chapter, Paul defends his apostolic credentials. Granted, this was important, as Paul’s opponents were apparently attacking his credentials. More important, though, is the function of that section. Paul grounds the argument about his apostleship in his claim that he, unlike his opponents, was not interested in pleasing men because his Gospel came directly from Christ (1:10-12). In a similar move, he caps off his discussion by reminding the Galatians of his encounter with Peter, where rather than attempting to please men, he condemned Peter to his face for compromising the Gospel of Jesus Christ.It is therefore evident that the first two chapters serve to introduce Paul’s main charge and his basic question—a question that grounds the whole book. He asks, “Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?” (Gal 3:2-3, ESV). The key word here is “perfected” (επιτελεω), which carries the idea of being brought to full maturity. In short, Paul is asking the Galatians if sanctification comes by the Spirit or by keeping the Law. In fact, that is the primary the issue that he takes up throughout the epistle.
  
  Five Word Pictures Describing the Law
  
  Given Paul’s focus on the means of sanctification, it is not surprising that he spends chapters two through four examining the relationship between faith and the Law. In doing so, he gives five word pictures by which he describes the Law that, taken as a whole, help clarify exactly for the reader Paul’s view on it.
  
  The Law as a Curse (Gal 3:10-14)
  
  Galatians 3:10-14,it must be admitted, is a notoriously difficult passage, not least of all because of its extremely compressed logic. Still, it seems one is on safe ground in recognizing that in this passage Paul compares the Law to a curse. Specifically in verse thirteen, “of the Law” should be considered an appositional genitive, which equates the Law with a curse. Moreover, this is a case of metonymy, an “extremely common” device by which people “take one well-understood or easy-to-perceive aspect of something and use it to stand either for the thing as a whole or for some other part of it.” In this case, the notion of a “curse” is abstract, but its basic idea is obvious. It conjures up a sense of dread of an imposed evil. “Of the Law” serves as a salient example of a curse. “The Law” is a concrete notion, and thus, so linked, it helps the reader grasp not only the broader category of “curse,”but Paul’s own view of the Law. Since Paul sees the Law as a type of curse, he says plainly in verse ten, “all who rely on works of the law are under a curse.”
  
  The Law as a Jailor (Gal 3:22-23)
  
  Next, Paul pictures the Law as a jailor. He says it “imprisoned” (3:22, 23: συγκλειω) men “under sin . . . until the coming of faith.” Further, the Law “held captive” (φρουρεω) those under it. That which “imprisons” and “holds captive” is a jailor of some sort. The basic idea of this metaphor is clear. As a jailor restrains and incarcerates for a period of time, so too did the Law. The temporal aspect is evident not only in the metaphor, but in the text itself. Paul says men were imprisoned “before faith came . . . until the coming of faith.” Moreover, each of the verbs is in the aorist except “held captive,” which is imperfect (and thus suggestive of something that was the case but no longer is).
  
  The Law as a Pedagogue (Gal 3:24-25)
  
  Immediately after comparing the Law to a jailor, Paul shifts to a different but conceptually related analogy: a pedagogue. Unfortunately, this picture is almost entirely obscured by virtually all modern translations. It verse twenty-four, Paul says “the law was our παιδαγωγος,” with παιδαγωγος being variously rendered “guardian” (ESV/NIV/NET/HCSB), “schoolmaster” (KJV), and perhaps worst of all “tutor” (NASB/NKJV). It is unfortunate that each of these translations fail to capture the basic idea of the Greek term, and possibly harmful in that the translations carry ideas foreign to it. Pedagogues were slaves who were with children at all times, imposing discipline, and in general training them in virtue. Though they were known to be harsh disciplinarians, the main idea Paul seems to have in mind is the way they restricted children, and so the metaphor is similar to the jailor. Moreover, a pedagogue’s job was temporary. “All the sources condemn those who attempted to retain the restrictive control of the pedagogue—no matter how protective and beneficial those restrictions once were—once the charge had come of age.” Again, however, the notion of restriction was primarily a negative one, for whatever benefits the pedagogue may have provided, no one wished to be under the authority of one, and indeed, children longed for their freedom. Such ideas are obscured, if not totally lost, by translations such as “tutor” and “guardian.” Indeed, such words even carry positive connotations and thus completely miss Paul’s point! A further problem is found in that several translations, following the KJV, render εις in verse twenty-three “to lead us to.” Thus, the Law becomes a “tutor that leads us to Christ.” Yet εις should be translated temporally: “until.” Paul’s idea, again implicit in the metaphor and made explicit by his language, is that the Law’s function was temporary and ended with the coming of Christ.
  
  The Law as a House Manager (Gal 4:1-7)
  
  Next, Paul extends the metaphor of the pedagogue to include house managers. This is hardly surprising, as the concepts were even connected in extra-biblical Greek. The main difference in a guardian or house manager and a pedagogue was that the latter was a temporary position held over children. The former continued in their duties after the child was grown, at which point the child (now a man) as “owner of everything” (4:1) could exercise full authority. The basic idea in this metaphor, then, is that the Law kept men from exercising their full spiritual authority. But now that Christ has come, whatever function the Law may continue to have, it no longer is permitted to hinder the believer’s full access to the Father. Now, rather than being like slaves under (the curse of?) the Law, the believer is a free son: “And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into [your] hearts, crying, ‘Abba! Father!’ So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God.” (4:6-7).
  
  The Law as Hagar (Gal 4:21-31)
  
  Paul’s strongest picture comes in the last section of chapter four. There, he develops the story of Sarah and Isaac against Hagar and Ishmael. The Jews, of course, would have naturally related to the former pair. Paul, however, sets another rhetorical trap, for he points out that Isaac was the son of a free woman and Ishmael of a slave woman. Yet he then identifies those under the Law as “Hagar . . . [who] corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children” (4:25) He then presses his allegory further, pointing out that sons of the free woman (whom Paul has identified as the Galatian believers) must “cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman” (4:30). It is impossible to miss Paul’s point here. To be under the Law is to be in slavery, but to be under Christ is to be free. This theological truth, however, is not enough for Paul. He even wants the Galatian Church to excommunicate those who wish to practice the Law.
  
  The Principle of Sanctification in Galatians: Grace
  
  The brief analysis of the word pictures above makes it clear that, for Paul, sanctification does not come by living under the Law. On the contrary, to live under the Law is to be cursed, imprisoned, restrained, lacking authority and freedom, and near being cut off from the community of God in Christ. The sanctifying principle is not Law but grace (see 1:6). None of this is to suggest that the Law is evil. What all of the metaphors Paul uses have in common is the idea of a desire for freedom. Jailors, pedagogues, and house managers are all good in and of themselves, especially insofar as they restrain evil. Curses are evil, but they are “good” insofar as they are laid upon and destroy the wicked. Finally, it is good to protect the inheritance of one’s children, even if that means separating them from pretenders. In each case, then, Paul picks a good metaphor, but that goodness is in each object itself; it is not good to be under any of their authority. That, however, is just Paul’s point. Christians are not to desire to be under the Law for their sanctification. Such is a false gospel (1:8-9) and will only result in corruption (5:16-21). Those who live by faith under grace, however, will be perfected and will bear the fruit of the Spirit (5:22-26).

Anyway, try to figure out what's wrong with that computer of yours.

[crochet1949]

Jac -- thank you Very much.

[B. W.]

Your computer is probably blocking it.

Yes maybe is is a "works based computer" you think?