Galatians 2:17-19 – The Far, Far Better Way

Once again, here is my fairly literal translation of these verses:

¹⁷But if we ourselves are also found [to be] sinners [while] seeking to be justified in Christ, then [is] Christ a servant of sin? May it never be! ¹⁸For if I am building again those things which I destroyed, I am presenting myself [to be] a trespasser, ¹⁹for through the Law I died to the Law that I might live to God.

Commentators all try to decide if Paul is still speaking to Peter regarding his duplicity or if he is now simply discoursing the subject of justification for the benefit of the Galatians. I don’t see any clear evidence to definitively conclude the matter. But, regardless, Peter’s prevarication is still the backdrop of the discussion. With the “we ourselves” I would conclude Paul is referring to himself and his fellow Jews. He’s already acknowledged the Jewish penchant for calling the Gentiles “sinners.” Like all legalists in every age, the Jews’ lives were consumed with scrupulously “keeping the rules” (never mind Jesus called them a “wicked and adulterous generation” – Pharisees always have an amazing ability to figure out which rules they have to keep and which ones they can conveniently overlook), so, as they observed the Gentiles’ lives, all they could see was all the broken rules. Sinners!

So it would seem to me verse 17 is asking the question, “For those of us who accept salvation by grace and thus cast aside the scrupulous rule-keeping – if others see us “breaking the rules” and conclude we have become “sinners,” is it then somehow true that Jesus and His teachings actually promote sin?? Of course Paul’s answer is “May it never be!” – his oft repeated “Mai Genoito!”

I think in the next line, he’s saying after having embraced salvation by grace and taught it to others, if he himself returned to justification by law-keeping, that would in fact make him a trespasser. Of course the implication is that is exactly what Peter was doing.

And then he goes on to explain what Law-keepers cannot understand: “… through the Law I died to the Law that I might live to God”.   In “through the Law, I died to the Law,” I think what he means is that the Law did its job of condemning him and having realized its hopelessness, he turned to the only possible answer, justification by faith, apart from that Law. But note that justification by faith was not simply a way to escape condemnation. He does not say, “… through the Law I died to the Law that I might not be condemned.” He also doesn’t say, “… through the Law I died to the Law that I might live a lawless life.” Note again what he does say: “… through the Law I died to the Law that I might live to God”.  That I might live to God. This is what rule-keepers cannot understand. The issue isn’t rule-keeping or not. The issue is “living to God.” It is a relationship.

As I pointed out above, Jesus called the scrupulous rule-keeping Pharisees a “wicked and adulterous generation.” Like all rule-keepers of every age, the Pharisees conveniently picked which rules they needed to follow and which they could conveniently overlook. I have observed myself that some of the staunchest rule-keepers in the church today actually live unbelievably godless lives behind the scenes. That is why so many supposedly “fundamentalist” preachers and evangelists go down in immorality. Like the Pharisees, they put on a good face of rule-keeping, while having affairs and committing other acts of immorality, greed, deceit, and cruelty. Rule-keeping simply breeds rule- management.

Real justification by faith throws itself into the arms of Jesus and leaves a person not caring about “the rules” but rather in love with the God Who has saved them. They actually put aside rule-keeping “that I might live to God.” And, again, here is what rule-keepers cannot understand: living to God, living in love with Him, doesn’t make me go wild in immorality. I love Him. Why would I want to do things that displease Him? Isn’t that true in any love relationship? A man marries his wife and soon discovers there are things that displease her – like taking his shower in the morning. She doesn’t like it. She doesn’t like to sleep with a “dirty” man. So what does he do? He starts showering in the evening. Why? Because that is a new rule he has to keep? No. It has nothing to do with rules. He loves her. It pains him to see her displeased. He learns to call when he’ll be home late, put his clothes in the hamper, wipe his feet at the door, help her with the dishes, etc., etc. and why? Because he loves her. It’s not about rule-keeping. It’s about love. And so it is with any love relationship and so it is with God.

Again, rule-keepers cannot understand this. This is why those justified by faith still talk about “the law of the Spirit of life in Christ” (Rom 8:2) and the “perfect law of liberty” (James 1:25) and why we can say, “I delight in the Law of God in my inner man” (Rom 7:22). This is why Paul can say, “Sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace” (Rom 6:14).

As Paul says in I Tim 1:9, “Laws are for law-breakers.” A person who loves has risen to a far higher standard than “rules.” A person who loves sees the heart of the loved one. They see the goals. Then they don’t need “rules” because their heart already wishes to live pleasing their loved one. That is in part why Jesus can tell us (those justified by faith) that the entire Law can be summed up in just two commands, “Love God and love others.” A person who genuinely loves doesn’t need “rules.” Paul will go on to say this same thing later in Galatians, listing the fruit of the Spirit (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control) and then say, “Against such things there is no law” (5:22,23). You can’t make enough rules to produce love and joy and peace. Those are the blessings of living a love-life.

Once again, Sola Fide is not the “preferred method” of justification because it “works” or because it is the only alternative to law-keeping. Sola Fide is the method of salvation which God provided and it is far, far better than rule-keeping because it raises its people to the much higher standard of love. As Paul says to us in Romans,

⁸ Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. ⁹ The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not covet,”and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”^{] 10} Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

Peter, in his duplicity, was throwing all of this away. No wonder Paul withstood him to his face!

God help us all to see past our propensity for rule-keeping and help us to instead genuinely live a life of love.

What if everybody did?