THE MORALIST'S DEATH

 

Benjamin Franklin, the classic moralist, set out in life to achieve "moral perfection" through his little book of 13 virtues. For each virtue, he lined out seven columns, one for each day of the week. He would self-evaluate these virtues daily as he sought to be a better man, but at the age of 79, he had to admit that he had failed (Christensen, The Spiritual Life of Normal Christian, 132-133). The moralist thinks that you must live for law to live for God. Paul wrote that we must die to law to live for God (Luther, Galatians, 83). "For through law I died to law so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ." (Gal. 2:19).

The first word of the sentence is an emphatic "I" (ἐγὼ). The "I" of verse 18 is not emphatic because Paul was reflecting an accusation made by others against him, but the "I" in verse 19 is emphatic because Paul is now stressing his personal experience. Paul states, "I died to law" (νόμῳ ἀπέθανον). The Aorist active indicative is a declarative statement of a fact about his past. His death to the law is in contrast with his statement that "I might live for God" (θεῷ ζήσω). The first verb is declarative, stressing what is, and the second is subjunctive, stressing what might be. His death to the law is done, making possible his living for God. 

Death, in Paul's thinking, ends a relationship, but life opens up a new relationship (Longenecker, Galatians, 91). The contrasting datives "law" (νόμῳ) and "God" (θεῷ) are datives of relationship although the second dative (θεῷ) may be understood as a dative of advantage. We ceased our prior relationship to the law, but we now live for the advantage or benefit of God (Burton, Galatians, 134). When Christ justifies by grace through faith, our past is dead. A new life for God opens before us. The possibilities are endless.

The noun "law" (νόμος) lacks the article as it did in verse 16. An anarthrous noun usually carries a qualitative force stressing law in general as opposed to a specific code like the Mosaic Law. Burton argues that law in verse 16 should be taken qualitatively, meaning that Paul is talking about the law principle inherent in all cultures as opposed to the Law of Moses. However, in verse 18, Burton argues that Paul is referring specifically to the Mosaic Law even though the noun lacks the article (Burton, Galatians, cf. 120, 133). I think it best to remain consistent and understand "law" in a qualitative sense (Lightfoot, Galatians, 118). A law principle - moralism - undergirds all cultures, not just Judaism. Moralism is man's attempt to live for God and is always doomed to fail (Gal. 2:16). We must die to moralism to live for God.

There are two elements of our death to moralism. We die to law-keeping as a way to God 1) through the law and 2) through the cross. We die to law "through law" (διὰ νόμου), but our release from law comes only when we can say with Paul, "I have been crucified with Christ" (Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαι). Most translations take the second phrase as part of verse 20, but most critical Greek texts place the phrase as part of verse 19. It is probably better to take it with verse 19, explaining how we can be released from law-keeping to live for God (Longenecker, Galatians, 92).

We pass through three stages in the process of conversion to a new life for God (Lightfoot, Galatians, 118).

1) Before the law: I am a sinner but ignorant of my sin. Paul will expand his explanation of these stages in Romans 5-7. Sin entered the world through Adam and spread to all humanity. We are all sinners who are subject to death even though ignorant of the sin without the law (Rom. 5:12-14; 7:7). Sin, in one sense, might be considered dead until the law reveals it so the law could be said to stimulate or even create sin (Rom. 7:8-9).

2) Under the law: I am a sinner who becomes conscious of my sin. The law reveals my sin and condemns me to death, but the law cannot provide any solution for my sin. So the law defines, stimulates, and condemns my sin, making the law an instrument leading to my death. Sin uses the law to kill me (Rom. 7:7-12). However, the law is still holy and good (Rom. 7:12) because the law leads us to Christ (Gal. 3:24-25). Offering no remedy, the law shuts us up until we come to Christ's grace for release. In this way, we die to the law through the law.

3) Freed from the law - I am a sinner who has been justified by grace (Rom. 5:20-21). Paul uses his famous marriage analogy to make his point (Rom. 7:1-6). A wife is bound to her husband by law. Only the death of her husband releases her from her bondage under the law. Therefore, we were made to die to the law (ἐθανατώθητε τῷ νόμῳ) "through the body of Christ" (διὰ τοῦ σώματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ) which is another way to say that we have been crucified with Christ (Rom. 7:4). The death of Christ releases us from the jurisdiction of the law, so don't remarry the dead man by placing yourselves under the law.

My conviction of sin comes through the law. My release from guilt comes by the cross of Christ. Thank you, Jesus, for liberating me from the bondage of moralism.

THE PARADOX OF MORALISM

"O Lord Jesus, I come unto Thee, and I pray Thee that these burdens and this straitness of my rule and religion may be a full recompense for all my sins."

Here is the prayer of the moralist. Martin Luther prayed these words regularly when he was a non-Christian (Luther, Galatians, 82). He was obsessed with being good before he understood the good news about his badness. Once he grasped the gospel, he renounced his goodness to rejoice in Christ's goodness. The gospel transformed his life and rescued him from moralism.

WHAT IS MORALISM?

Moralism teaches that our good works earn God's favor. What we do that is good pays for what we have done that is bad. Moralism expresses religion's path to God. Good people will one day stand before God, and the good they do will outweigh the bad they have done, claims the moralist.

Sadly, many preach moralism after starting well with grace. The more we push morality, the less we preach grace because moralism nullifies grace. Paul dealt with moralism as he witnessed Peter turn back to follow Jewish religious rules about eating and drinking. Paul writes, "For if I rebuild what I have once destroyed, I prove myself to be a transgressor" (Gal. 2:18).

The clause "what I once destroyed" (ἃ κατέλυσα) comes first in the sentence for emphasis. The verb means to dismantle a building or repeal a law (BAGD, 414). The condition (εἰ) is a simple condition, not a contrary to fact condition, so Paul is referring to what actually happened, which he explained in verse 16. Paul had trusted in the law to make himself good enough for God. When Paul turned to Christ, he repealed the law as a way to be right with God. He dismantled law righteousness to accept Christ's righteousness.

By insisting that Christians obey the law, Paul would now be rebuilding (οἰκοδομῶ) the law that he once dismantled. If that is the case, then he proves himself to be a transgressor of the law. The present tense verb (συνιστάνω) used with the reflexive pronoun "myself" (ἐμαυτὸν) means to show or represent one's self as a transgressor (R&R, Linguistic Key, 506). Paul uses the word "transgressor" (παραβάτην) because the term connotes a violator of the true intent of the whole law more than any single statute in the law (Burton, Galatians, 131). If he builds up what he once dismantled, then, either way, he is a transgressor. He either transgressed the law by dismantling it, or he transgresses God's salvific solution by rebuilding it. The one activity negates the other activity (Bruce, Galatians, 142). Law and grace cannot both be right.

PARADOXICAL MORALITY

The paradox of moralism is the better we try to be, the worse we prove to be. The gospel of grace tells me that I become a Christian by renouncing my faith in my goodness to place my faith in Christ's goodness alone. I must accept that I am a sinner to believe in Christ as my Savior. If I return to stressing my moral goodness, I nullify Christ's grace and prove to be a worse sinner than before. There must be no mixing of my goodness with Christ's goodness to earn God's approval. To follow Christ, we must renounce moralism.

The paradox of moralism is the more we preach morality, the less we preach Christ, leading to greater immorality. Moralism creeps into our "culture wars" preaching. In our striving to see righteousness permeate our society, we slide into moralistic preaching implicitly communicating that we can create a moral world without Christ. Slipping into moralism minimizes Christ. The solution to the world's immorality is the goodness of Christ, not the morality of humanity. Unless people give up on their goodness to accept Christ's goodness, there will never be social goodness.

Our culture will never be transformed by preaching moralism. Good works flow from changed hearts. Society is changed by regeneration, not legislation. The gospel is the most transformative power the world has ever seen. Let's preach the gospel, not moralism!

NEW BOOK ANNOUNCEMENT

I am excited to announce that my latest book is now available from the publisher.

BOOK SYNOPSIS

How can we preach persuasively without huckstering, manipulating, or coercing people? Sadly, we are seeing the fall of many pastors not for reasons of sexual immorality, but the pursuit of pride and power. The skillful use of marketing methods creates celebrity pastors who become significant influencers in the evangelical church. The lure of success is seductive, turning pastors into hucksters and Christians into consumers. We need to heed the warnings of the New Testament about the pride of rhetoric and the pursuit of power. David Christensen carefully analyzes the biblical warnings of Paul about the temptations of rhetorical sophistry in the first-century church and applies them to pastoral ministry today. God calls preachers to be ethical and effective persuaders. David develops an ethical grid for pastoral persuasion using principles drawn from the Bible and social science along with practical illustrations from his years of ministry. He calls preachers to be ethical and effective persuaders by emphasizing the centrality of the word of God while depending on the power of the Spirit of God.

BOOK REVIEWS

"There’s no shortage of books on how to preach effective sermons, but rarely can you find a work that digs deep into the inner workings of how persuasion can be done with biblical authority and integrity. Drawing from a well dug deep through years of experience as a pastor and educator, David Christensen unpacks both the historic and popular techniques used by preachers and examines whether they measure up to the biblical standard for conveying doctrine, reproof, correction and training in righteousness." (Rick Francis, New England Consultant for the Cecil B. Day Foundation)

"The Persuasive Preacher calls pastors to present God’s Word with biblical authority and boldness. Christensen, a seasoned pastor and professor, understands and effectively communicates why and how preachers should use biblical persuasion techniques. He also acknowledges the responsibility of listeners to respond, without any unethical manipulation from the preachers. Numerous illustrations reinforce his pertinent arguments. I consider this book a welcome companion to my own volume, Persuasive Preaching." (R. Larry Overstreet, retired professor at Corban University School of Ministry)

"For decades David Christensen has not only studied and taught the proper use of persuasion in preaching and ministry, he has also practiced it. His book provides the historical and biblical background for understanding the issues involved.  It is filled with practical examples, both positive and negative, which equip the reader to both preach and pastor with greater integrity and effectiveness." (David Lambertson, faculty member at New England Bible College and Grace Evangelical Seminary)

HOW TO BUY THE BOOK

You can purchase the book through Amazon, where it is available in both print and Kindle formats. You can also buy the book directly from the publisher by clicking the link below.

https://wipfandstock.com/the-persuasive-preacher.html

FREEDOM FROM PERFORMANCE RIGHTEOUSNESS

Legalism advocates performance righteousness. We are righteous because we do the right things. Paul is dealing with the Christian legalism that Peter displayed by withdrawing from Gentile Christians to follow the dietary restrictions of the Jewish Christians. Nobody can be justified by observing the law, Paul argues. We are justified by faith in Christ alone. Living right cannot save us. But the legalist objects, and Paul raises their objection. Whether the words reflect the views of Peter or the other Jewish Christians, Paul emphatically responds to the argument of the legalist.

"But if, while seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves have also been found sinners, is Christ then a minister of sin? May it never be!" (Gal. 2:17)

Here we find the legalist's argument. Disobedience of the law is sin. If we abandon the law to be justified by Christ, then we become sinners. The result is that Christ becomes a servant of sin by creating more sinners through justification. The legalist argues this is absurd, thus discrediting Paul's argument for justification by faith alone (See Burton, Galatians, 124-130).

Let's dissect the legalist's argument in this verse. Paul establishes two premises to their argument, followed by a question. Then he emphatically answers their questionable conclusion.

FIRST PREMISE: Justification by faith nullifies justification by law.

The legalist's first premise is correct. The condition (if - εἰ) is a simple condition, which means that Paul assumed the truth of the condition (Dana & Mantey, Grammar, 289). The participle "while seeking" (ζητοῦντες) is best understood as temporal. While depending on justification "in Christ" (ἐν Χριστῷ - v.17), we must deny any justification "by works of law" (ἐξ ἔργων νόμου - v.16). Paul will make this truth explicit when he writes, "I died to law (νόμῳ ἀπέθανον - v.19). Righteousness in Christ nullifies righteousness by works. The two are mutually exclusive. On this point, the legalist is right.

SECOND PREMISE: Christians are found to be violators of God's law.

To abandon the law is to become a sinner, the legalist argues. We "have been found" (εὐρέθημεν) usually introduces an element of surprise. It is a surprising twist to realize that trusting in Christ's righteousness means accepting that we are sinners. Abandoning the law makes the Jews sinners (ἁμαρτωλοί) just like the Gentiles are sinners (ἁμαρτωλοί). Paul returns to his statement in verse 15. The Jews trusted in their righteousness earned by observing the law and considered the Gentiles to be sinners because they did not follow the law. Justification by faith in Christ forces us to abandon our faith in the law. To abandon the law makes us violators of the law (Lightfoot, Galatians, 116-117). Correct again! We are all sinners.

LOGICAL QUESTION: Does this make Christ a servant of sin?

Paul accepts both premises as correct, which leads the legalist to argue that Christ, then, is a servant of sin (ἁμαρτίας διάκανος). He makes people become sinners to be justified by Him, which, the legalist argues, is absurd. Legalism argues that we must trust Christ and keep the law. It is justification by faith plus performing religious requirements that save us. The legalist does not deny justification by faith but adds justification by works. Paul points out that the addition is subtraction. Once you add faith in performance righteousness, you deny faith in Christ's righteousness.

Is the clause a declarative statement or a question? The introductory particle can be accented in two ways (ἆρα or ἄρα). The former is an interrogative, and the latter is an inferential particle translated, "so then." The verse reads either "is Christ a servant of sin" or "so then Christ is a servant of sin." In this verse, we have an interrogative particle because of what follows in the text.  Whenever Paul uses the expression "may it never be" (μὴ γένοιτο), he uses it to answer a question (Blass & Debrunner, Grammar, 220, 194; Burton, Galatians, 126)). We should understand the text as a question that Paul emphatically answers in the negative.

CONCLUSION: No! Absolutely not!

If morally righteous people must become sinners to be saved, then does this not make Christ an agent of sin? No! Absolutely not! Paul rejects this conclusion as abhorrent. Justification by faith in Christ's righteousness does not make anyone a sinner. Everyone is already a sinner. Morally righteous people, including law-abiding Jews, are sinners already. The law, moral code, merely reveals the sin (Bruce, Galatians, 141). Accepting Christ's righteousness by faith means rejecting our righteousness for salvation. The gospel does not increase the number of sinners in the world, making Christ an agent of sin. The gospel provides a solution for all the sinners in the world to be saved by Christ's righteousness.

• Thank you, Jesus, that I am a sinner, and you are a Savior.
• Thank you, Jesus, that I cannot justify myself by my performance of any code of conduct.
• Thank you, Jesus, that I died with you to my self-righteousness so that I can live with you by your true righteousness.
• Thank you, Jesus, that I cannot add one smidgeon of my righteousness to your righteousness.

SOLA FIDE

The church, in Martin Luther's day, taught that works of faith were a means of grace. If a person performed a good work by his own inclination - giving alms, for example - this person earned the  "grace of congruence." He was acting in congruence with God's grace, and so was worthy to receive God's grace even though a sinner. Once he received God's grace, he could do works by faith in God's grace and so be worthy of eternal life.

Luther wrote: "Wherefore, with Paul, we utterly deny the merit of congruence and worthiness, and affirm that these speculations are nothing else but mere deceits of Satan. For God never gave to any man grace and everlasting life for the merit of congruence or worthiness" (Luther, Galatians, 67).

Paul wrote: "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of law but only through faith in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 2:16).

Sola Fide!

The little connective translated, "but only" (ἐὰν μὴ) is critical to the argument of Paul. It can be interpreted in two ways, as an exception or an adversative (Burton, Galatians, 121). If it is understood as an exceptive, then the work of faith is an exception to the works of law. Man cannot be justified by the works of law except through the "work of" faith in Christ Jesus. Human faith is an exception to other human works by which humans earn the "grace of congruence" from God.

May it never be! The connective is an adversative, introducing something that is the opposite of work. We should translate it, "but only" not "except by" (Moulton, Grammar, 1:241). Faith is not a different kind of work. We are not justified by the works of faith. Faith is not a work at all, and no work done by faith can earn God's grace. Otherwise, we turn God into a debtor who owes us eternal life (Luther, Galatians, 66).

"But only" means sola fide!

"Through faith in Jesus Christ," we are justified, Paul continues. "Jesus Christ" is in the genitive case modifying "faith." Some have interpreted "Jesus Christ" as a subjective genitive meaning that we are justified by Christ's faithfulness. However, it is best to understand "Jesus Christ" as an objective genitive meaning that Christ is the object of our faith. Our faith is placed in Christ (Bruce, Galatians, 138-139; Murray, Romans, 363-374). Paul bolsters this interpretation by adding, "we, ourselves, have believed in Christ Jesus" (εἰς Χριστὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν), making Christ clearly the object of our faith.

John Calvin defined faith as "a knowledge of the divine benevolence (grace) toward us and a sure persuasion of its truth" (Calvin, Institutes, 3.2.12). Being persuaded by God's grace, we rest on Christ for salvation, knowing that we do not deserve nor can we earn any favor from God by any merit of our own.

OUR BEST BEFORE GOD

How can humans be accepted by God? Can our best efforts gain God's favor? Every church faces the temptation to slide into practical Pelagianism - measuring righteousness by the best we can do apart from God's enabling grace. Subtly, a performance mentality seeps into our church life even as we preach Christ's gospel. Do we earn God's approval by what we do, or does God grant His acceptance because of what He has done?

Paul finally arrives at the central question of his letter to the Galatians: "knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified" (Gal. 2:16).

Three vital theological terms leap out of the text: "justified" (δικαιόω), "law" (νόμος) and "faith" (πίστις). All three terms are significant in the vocabulary of Paul and central to his argument in both Galatians and his longer epistle, Romans. Few words have been analyzed by theologians more frequently than justification producing an indisputably clear meaning. The term does not refer to moral causation. It is judicial and forensic in essence. God does not make us righteous in justification. He declares us to be right. Justification carries a sense of God's acceptance and approval. Since God's acceptance of us is not based on our merits but on His work, our righteousness can rightly be said to be God's righteousness (Burton, Galatians, 460-474).

The term "justified" occurs three times, and each time it is passive. We do not justify ourselves but are justified by another. God declares us right as we stand before Him. The first verb is in the present tense (δικαιοῦται), indicating an ongoing truth. The negative with the present tense tells us that justification can never be achieved by the observance of the law (R&R, Linguistic Key, 506). The second verb is an Aorist subjunctive (δικαιωθῶμεν) teaching that justification is a general truism. The third use of the term is in the future tense (δικαιωθησέται). Nobody will ever be justified by the works of the law. Paul has covered all the time zones to make his point.

Three times in this one verse, Paul tells us we are not justified "by the works of the Law" (ἐξ ἔργων νόμου). The preposition "by" (ἐξ) emphasizes the source of our justification. Paul did not have a convenient term like "legalism" to describe the issues he faced, so he used this expression to make his point. Legalism is any attempt to justify oneself by obedience to the law (Bruce, Galatians, 137). "Law" is in the genitive case. I don't think it is a subjective genitive as if the law can produce the works. It is an objective genitive meaning that the object of our works is the law. We choose to do what we think will fulfill the law to justify ourselves (Meyer, Galatians, 85).

The expression works of the law (ἐξ ἔργων νόμου) is parallel to the expression "faith in Jesus Christ" (δὶα πίστεως ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ). The object of works is the law. The object of faith is Christ (Meyer, Galatians, 85). Here too, the genitive "Jesus Christ" (᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ) is an objective genitive, not a subjective genitive (Bruce, Galatians, 138-139). Christ does not produce faith (subjective genitive). He is the object of our faith (objective genitive). We place our faith in Christ Jesus because He is the one who justifies us.

Unfortunately, the NASB mistranslates the phrase as "the works of the Law," capitalizing law to identify it as the Mosaic law. Both "law" and "works" are anarthrous and should be translated "works of law." Paul is not talking just about "the Law," a specific code of conduct revealed through Moses. He is talking about divine law in general, all that is in accord with the character and will of God. Without the article, Paul stresses the qualitative nature of God's law. Paul expands his thought in Romans where he uses the same clause "works of law" to describe the Gentiles who are accountable to God's law without possessing the Mosaic Law (Rom. 2:11-16; cf. 3:20, 28). All attempts to curry God's favor by law-keeping, whether written or unwritten, do not work (Burton, Galatians, 120, 443-460).

Religion's temptation is to drift toward works righteousness. In our pride, we determine to control our destiny by what we do instead of accepting what He has done. We develop selective righteousness in our churches as a means of quantifying holiness - an unwritten code of conduct. A performance mentality grips our faith as we parade our works of law before God and others.

Lord, root out in me any subtle seepage of pride that trusts my works over your work, my achievements over your sacrifice.

WALKING THE GOSPEL PATH

We talk a good gospel, but do we walk a good gospel? Do we stay on or stray from the gospel path? Paul publicly rebuked Peter and Barnabas because he saw that "they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel" (Gal. 2:14).

Galatians 2:14 is the only place in the New Testament where we find this verb "were not straightforward" (ὀρθοποδοῦσιν). The word comes from two Greek roots, "standing straight up" (ὁρθός) and "foot" (πούς). It means to "stand erect on the feet." In other words, Paul says that we are not to waver or stumble as we walk (TDNT, 5:449-451).

The verb is followed by the preposition "about" (πρὸς) which, when used with the accusative case as here, commonly indicates motion toward some destination. However, it can mean "with" or "according to" something. For this reason, two possible interpretations have developed about the statement. Paul might be saying 1) their actions do not square with the truth of the gospel, or 2) they are not advancing toward the truth of the gospel (Moule, Idiom Book, 52-53). Are they not standing upright as measured by the truth of the gospel, or are they not walking toward the right goal?

I think it best to interpret Paul as saying that they are not walking straight on the path to the truth of the gospel. They have taken the wrong road. They have strayed from the path (Bruce, Galatians, 132). The expression "truth of the gospel" refers back to the same phrase in Galatians 2:5. To walk straight toward the truth of the gospel is our goal. The danger is that we get off track. We get distracted by life. The twists and turns, the rocks and bumps of life cause us to stumble. We take detours that compromise the truth of the gospel by our personal preferences and legalistic convictions. We lose our way, causing others to go astray.

Why did Paul confront Peter "in the presence of all" (Gal. 2:14)? Why not confront Peter privately following Jesus' instructions (Mt. 18:15)? The confrontation was public because the sin was public. Public sin by church leaders requires public correction to deter others from sliding into the same sin (1 Tim. 5:20). The rule of thumb for discerning our response to sin on the public/private continuum is simple. The degree to which sin is public is the degree to which sin must be corrected publicly.

Scripture does not record Peter's response. He may have rationalized his behavior by arguing that he was acting out of concern for the weaker Christians from Jerusalem. Peter may have argued something similar to Paul's own dictum to be "all things to all people," including being under the law to those under the law (1 Cor. 9:19-23). He was merely being politically correct for the sake of the church in Jerusalem. However, there are clear limitations to such actions. Our position cannot justify the damage done to the gospel message. (Bruce, Galatians, 132-134). What went on in the background, we can only speculate. Nevertheless, neither church politics nor weaker brother arguments should be allowed to distract from the truth of the gospel.

Walking the gospel path is difficult at times. Martin Luther wrote, "many have the gospel, but not the truth of the gospel." We can preach the gospel with our words, but stray from the gospel with our works. Actions that reinforce the law nullify the gospel. The gospel path has many rocks and twists, temptations and distractions, that can cause us to stumble on the way or lead us off the path of truth. Luther acknowledged how hard it is to stay on the gospel path. "In the time of temptation, I confess that I myself do not know how to do it as I ought" (Luther, Galatians, 61).