Evangel...dichotomy?

[Tom]

How can anyone know where they will be if they don't know what their genes are? and what about half Jewish people? Why doesn't the New Testament address the issue of the destiny of mixed races?

I think Paul was pure Jewish, even though he's in the body of Christ, and he and his Jewish brothers who are also in the body of Christ will be snatched away with those of us who aren't Jewish simply because we've all been chosen to believe in salvation in grace through faith. I also believe lots of people who lived before there even were any Jews won't be snatched away to meet Christ in the air, but they'll be subject to the kingdom of the heavens.

[Tom]

The long article above is full of assumptions and bizarre interpretations. It says that Paul's gospel was an immediate improvement on Peter's because Paul's recognized Jesus as the Son of God, whereas Peter's had Him as Lord. But this makes no sense...it was Peter who first confessed Christ as the Son of the Living God, and it was indeed Peter who first preached to the 'Uncircumcision', at the house of Cornelius. I can only imagine what embarrassment Peter had if he came across a Jewish servant of Cornelius and had to take him to one side to explain the other evangel!  :winkgrin:

It also says Paul was not qualified as an apostle of the circumcision because he did not have the moral excellence of someone like Nataniel. What? Has the writer not heard that God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise? Christ did not need to search for those with moral excellence, rather He chose those He would fill with His own moral excellence at Pentecost!

Also, if one of the 'evangels' - remembering that evangel means good message or good news, is about the failure of the Jews, how is that message good news? How does it qualify as an 'evangel'? I suppose one might say that as God is sovereign, even failure and darkness eventually is good news as all will ultimately be summed up in Christ etc, but then there becomes no need to label any news as anything other than 'good', as all things work together for good. So we might as well tell someone that their beloved dying is good news, or that their dog getting run over is good news, because it is all planned to work out in the end.

One sure sign of the 'two evangels' being a faulty premise is the way it takes the focus of the good news away from Jesus Christ, and onto the believer or people group. The reason there is only one evangel, is that there is only One Jesus Christ. There is no good news other than Him, and no good message other than Him. To divide up the news of Christ is to separate His body, and show partiality to the flesh. The gospel is not about people groups - it is about Jesus Christ, and it IS Jesus Christ.

I think we all make "assumptions," as you say, because that's what faith is.

"Faith is an assumption of what is being expected, a conviction concerning matters which are not being observed." (Hebrews 11:1)

And I think the articles only may have seemed to have "bizarre interpretations," as you say, because they don't conform to orthodox theology. I used to be unaware that the evangel of the uncircumcision Paul preached was different, but now I understand.

It was Paul, James, Cephas, and John who made the distinction, and Paul warned about mixing the evangels in Galatians to produce a distorted evangel that he even cursed. I think it is this distorted evangel that is orthodox theology.

"I am marveling that thus, swiftly, you are transferred from that which calls you in the grace of Christ, to a different evangel, which is not another, except it be that some who are disturbing you want also to distort the evangel of Christ. But if ever we also, or a messenger out of heaven, should be bringing an evangel to you beside that which we bring to you, let him be anathema!" (Galatians 1:6-8)

"But, on the contrary, perceiving that I have been entrusted with the evangel of the Uncircumcision, according as Peter of the Circumcision (for He Who operates in Peter for the apostleship of the Circumcision operates in me also for the nations), and, knowing the grace which is being given to me, James and Cephas and John, who are supposed to be pillars, give to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we, indeed, are to be for the nations, yet they for the Circumcision." (Galatians 2:7-9)

Peter had to be given a vision to convince him to go to Cornelius, and his brothers gave him a hard time about it afterwards.

I think the author of the article you spoke of was referring to Paul killing believers before seeing the light, but that was why he was the perfect person to show the power of grace to change somebody's life.

The two evangels does not take the focus away from Christ, as you say, because the whole purpose is to put the spotlight on Christ instead of the law.

The Jews looked forward to their promised kingdom of the heavens on earth in Israel ruled by Messiah in Jerusalem, right? But Paul was preaching that the body of Christ would have an eonian celestial destiny.

I think the fulfillment of the promised kingdom of the heavens is now paused until all those chosen are called out of the nations, and then this era of grace will come to a close when the Unveiling of Jesus Christ will happen.

I think it's just all about the Jews being God's chosen people to minster to the nations on earth in the coming eon while those chosen to be in the body of Christ minister in the celestial realm.

Scripture doesn't say what happens after the consummation of the eons except that God will be all in all, and I think that's sufficient.

[Seth]

How can anyone know where they will be if they don't know what their genes are? and what about half Jewish people? Why doesn't the New Testament address the issue of the destiny of mixed races?

I think Paul was pure Jewish, even though he's in the body of Christ, and he and his Jewish brothers who are also in the body of Christ will be snatched away with those of us who aren't Jewish simply because we've all been chosen to believe in salvation in grace through faith. I also believe lots of people who lived before there even were any Jews won't be snatched away to meet Christ in the air, but they'll be subject to the kingdom of the heavens.

If that's the case, then it means that some Jewish people were selected to be Christians and recieve liberty, while other Jewish Christians were selected for slavery to an evangel of failure only to exposed as having been instructed by Apostles to do things they were never able to do. So SOME Jewish Christians got a great evangel, while others were given a gospel that preached freedom but could not and would not deliver on it.

Basically those unfortunate Jewish believers were sold a bill of goods by those Apostles.

[Shev]

The long article above is full of assumptions and bizarre interpretations. It says that Paul's gospel was an immediate improvement on Peter's because Paul's recognized Jesus as the Son of God, whereas Peter's had Him as Lord. But this makes no sense...it was Peter who first confessed Christ as the Son of the Living God, and it was indeed Peter who first preached to the 'Uncircumcision', at the house of Cornelius. I can only imagine what embarrassment Peter had if he came across a Jewish servant of Cornelius and had to take him to one side to explain the other evangel!  :winkgrin:

It also says Paul was not qualified as an apostle of the circumcision because he did not have the moral excellence of someone like Nataniel. What? Has the writer not heard that God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise? Christ did not need to search for those with moral excellence, rather He chose those He would fill with His own moral excellence at Pentecost!

Also, if one of the 'evangels' - remembering that evangel means good message or good news, is about the failure of the Jews, how is that message good news? How does it qualify as an 'evangel'? I suppose one might say that as God is sovereign, even failure and darkness eventually is good news as all will ultimately be summed up in Christ etc, but then there becomes no need to label any news as anything other than 'good', as all things work together for good. So we might as well tell someone that their beloved dying is good news, or that their dog getting run over is good news, because it is all planned to work out in the end.

One sure sign of the 'two evangels' being a faulty premise is the way it takes the focus of the good news away from Jesus Christ, and onto the believer or people group. The reason there is only one evangel, is that there is only One Jesus Christ. There is no good news other than Him, and no good message other than Him. To divide up the news of Christ is to separate His body, and show partiality to the flesh. The gospel is not about people groups - it is about Jesus Christ, and it IS Jesus Christ.

I think we all make "assumptions," as you say, because that's what faith is.

"Faith is an assumption of what is being expected, a conviction concerning matters which are not being observed." (Hebrews 11:1)

And I think the articles only may have seemed to have "bizarre interpretations," as you say, because they don't conform to orthodox theology. I used to be unaware that the evangel of the uncircumcision Paul preached was different, but now I understand.

It was Paul, James, Cephas, and John who made the distinction, and Paul warned about mixing the evangels in Galatians to produce a distorted evangel that he even cursed. I think it is this distorted evangel that is orthodox theology.

"I am marveling that thus, swiftly, you are transferred from that which calls you in the grace of Christ, to a different evangel, which is not another, except it be that some who are disturbing you want also to distort the evangel of Christ. But if ever we also, or a messenger out of heaven, should be bringing an evangel to you beside that which we bring to you, let him be anathema!" (Galatians 1:6-8)

"But, on the contrary, perceiving that I have been entrusted with the evangel of the Uncircumcision, according as Peter of the Circumcision (for He Who operates in Peter for the apostleship of the Circumcision operates in me also for the nations), and, knowing the grace which is being given to me, James and Cephas and John, who are supposed to be pillars, give to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we, indeed, are to be for the nations, yet they for the Circumcision." (Galatians 2:7-9)

Peter had to be given a vision to convince him to go to Cornelius, and his brothers gave him a hard time about it afterwards.

I think the author of the article you spoke of was referring to Paul killing believers before seeing the light, but that was why he was the perfect person to show the power of grace to change somebody's life.

The two evangels does not take the focus away from Christ, as you say, because the whole purpose is to put the spotlight on Christ instead of the law.

The Jews looked forward to their promised kingdom of the heavens on earth in Israel ruled by Messiah in Jerusalem, right? But Paul was preaching that the body of Christ would have an eonian celestial destiny.

I think the fulfillment of the promised kingdom of the heavens is now paused until all those chosen are called out of the nations, and then this era of grace will come to a close when the Unveiling of Jesus Christ will happen.

I think it's just all about the Jews being God's chosen people to minster to the nations on earth in the coming eon while those chosen to be in the body of Christ minister in the celestial realm.

Scripture doesn't say what happens after the consummation of the eons except that God will be all in all, and I think that's sufficient.

I don't see anything in υπoστασις of 'assumption', but either way, I was not making the assertion in a vacuum, but giving examples of what I considered to be bizarre assumption, such as Paul's gospel being the first to see Christ as the Son of God, and Nathaniel being chosen for his character, etc etc. I apologize if it came across as randomly insulting the writer!

Believe, me 'orthodox theology' is not anything I am remotely concerned with, nor do I think anyone on here is!  :dsunny:

I see your argument about the spotlight being on Christ, but I feel as though in the two evangel theory, one spotlight is on the law, on the failure of man, and on the Jewish race. The reason I more specifically say this is that in the writings I have perused on the subject, there always seems to be a great amount of attention given to these things, whether it is differentiating between Jews and Gentiles, or explaining why certain Jews need to have a message of failure. I simply don't see how all of this is putting a spotlight on Christ.

"But, on the contrary, perceiving that I have been entrusted with the evangel of the Uncircumcision, according as Peter of the Circumcision (for He Who operates in Peter for the apostleship of the Circumcision operates in me also for the nations), and, knowing the grace which is being given to me, James and Cephas and John, who are supposed to be pillars, give to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we, indeed, are to be for the nations, yet they for the Circumcision." (Galatians 2:7-9)

With regards to the above quote, I agree that Paul was sent to the nations, and Peter to the Jews (by and large), but this by no means definitively states that there are two gospels, any more than someone being sent to Angola as a missionary means that they have a different gospel for the Angolans. Indeed, Paul - at least twice - preached to Jews and then asserted to them that he was moving on to the Gentiles because the Jews were rejecting the gospel, and not accounting themselves worthy of the life of the ages. They were rejecting the one gospel which he spoke, not receiving their own evangel.

[Tom]

I think everybody experiences the futility of trying to save themselves, not just the Jewish people, even those who follow orthodox theology, and even those who are unbelievers. The Jewish people will be blessed with their promised kingdom of the heavens in Israel with Messiah that is the hope of all the Jewish people, and all the nations on earth will come to God through Israel. So it's not just the law that demonstrates the futility of man trying to save himself, but the pride of all men. The Jewish believers kept their law, but Paul preached an evangel apart from law to the nations. We're not subject to the law, never have been, and never will be because we weren't given the law even though orthodox theology teaches that. I think some people have come to believe in the salvation of all mankind, but are still deceived by other beliefs of orthodox theology. There are variations of doctrine in Christendom. That's why there are so many denominations. I think the church thinking its spiritual Israel is a prime example. I think God has simply chosen one group of people to do his will on earth in the coming eon while another group is doing his will in the celestial realm, and eventually God will be all in all. So I don't think the Jewish people got a bad deal, as has been said, because God blesses everybody according to his will.

[Tom]

http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V65P2 p251
Have a Pattern of Sound Words

SPURIOUS SPIRITUALITY

     The word "spiritual" has often served to conceal the lack of a real, scriptural basis for a teaching. The church is said to be "spiritual Israel," and the prophesies concerning that nation are "spiritually applied" to the present in the chapter headings of the Authorized Version. The millennium is explained away by making it "spiritual." We even hear of "spiritual death," although all death must, of necessity, be utterly lacking in spirituality. It is evident that, in many cases, our western minds have been bewildered by figures of speech, and we have tried to cover our confusion by calling things "spiritual" to escape unbelief. Judging from the past we should be very careful in the use of this term in the interpretation of the Scriptures. Let us test it carefully lest it lead us astray by its elusiveness.


"SPIRITUAL ISRAEL"

     This innocent-looking phrase practically repudiates God's whole prophetic program. All that He promised to His people is filched from them and "applied" to others on the plea that it must be understood "spiritually." Just as if there will be nothing spiritual in the coming Kingdom! In that day Jehovah will put a new spirit within them (Ezek.36:26). He will pour out His spirit upon the house of Israel (Ezek.39:29). Indeed, He will pour out His spirit upon all flesh (Joel 2:28; Acts 2:17). The only spiritual Israel known to God's Word is that which will be found in that Kingdom. Yet this phrase is used to do away with it! They will be far more spiritual than is the church which seeks to displace them by means of this subterfuge.

p252
Spiritual or Figurative?

     On all sides today this idea is distorting the testimony of the church, and engaging it with that which is on the earth, not that which is above. It would seem that nothing could more effectively keep it from entertaining its real spiritual blessings among the celestials (Eph.1:3) than this notion that Israel has utterly failed, so that God's promises will not be fulfilled, except in a "spiritual" way to the church which takes over what they have forfeited. The worst effect is that it prevents the saints from entering into the truth for today. The church is not literal Israel, nor figurative Israel, and, least of all "spiritual" Israel. It is the literal Israel of the future that will be spiritual. Let us not get the idea that "spiritual" denotes figurative. What is really meant is that the church is figurative Israel. But "spiritual" is a much more subtle term, implying, as it does, that Israel was carnal and we are spiritual, which contains enough truth to confuse and mislead the saints.



SPIRITUAL MILLENNIUM

     Not only is a literal kingdom looked upon as "carnal," but the millennium is decried as a most unspiritual idea which can find only a "spiritual" fulfillment in the history of the church. What is really meant, of course, is a figurative fulfillment, but the word spiritual is usually preferred, for it stamps believers in a literal millennium as lacking in spiritual discernment, if they are not downright carnal. It is this implication in the word "spiritual" which makes it such a favorite weapon to destroy faith in the promises of God.

     I am reminded of my own experience at the very beginning of my new life. The head of a school of theology wished to have a pamphlet printed showing

p253
Death is Never Spiritual

how unspiritual and carnal the theory of a future literal kingdom is, according to the Scriptures. He had given the references, but feared that few of his readers would take the trouble to turn them up. So I was asked to put in the full text in each case. As I was very eager to settle this point for myself, I not only supplied the texts, but studied them carefully to see if they proved his position. As a result I became fully convinced that he was mistaken, judging alone from his own evidence. As I now recall, he misused this word "spiritual" in a most unspiritual way.



"SPIRITUAL DEATH"

     In my earliest efforts to solve the problem of the death which overtook Adam when he sinned, I fell back on a phrase then common among Bible expositors, that is, "spiritual death," in contrast to "physical death." Later, when I sought to avoid unsound, unscriptural expressions, I was forced to drop these non-scriptural phrases. Then I saw how misleading they were. The effect of Adam's sin was not confined to his spirit, and his relationship to God. It vitally affected his physical frame. He became mortal, in the active sense of dying, and this he has transmitted to the race, which accounts for all disease and sin as well as alienation from God. Adam and his posterity have been physically dying ever since. It is true that he became figuratively dead to God, yet the figure is not founded on his spirit alone, but upon his future literal death, which included spirit, soul and body.

     How confusing this manner of speaking may be, may be seen in the death of our Lord. He died physically when He commended His spirit into the hands of His Father (Luke 23:46). So it is with all flesh, for it has no life apart from the spirit. Literal

p254
Death is the Lack of Spirit

death always includes both flesh and spirit, for the flesh returns to the soil when the spirit returns to God. The converse is true also. Death limited to one of man's components is impossible, or figurative. The fact that unbelievers are figuratively dead to God is based upon their literal death. They are not dead to men, spiritually or otherwise. They are simply so oblivious of the Deity as if they were literally in the grave.

     The complement terms "spiritual life" and "physical life" are also non-scriptural and unsound, for they imply that there is life apart from spirit. It is not easy for us to avoid them because we are not accustomed to the language of figures which is so freely used in the Scriptures. It is necessary for us to break with these misleading expressions, however, for it is practically impossible to grasp the truth as to death and life so long as we harbor them.

     "In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen.2:17 AV). In my early studies in the Scriptures this passage caused me much concern, for it was very plain that Adam did not die that day. I was forced to accept the only explanation offered me at the time, that the death was "spiritual." So, I was told, all of Adam's descendants are also "spiritually" dead until they pass out of death into life (John 5:24). They are dead in trespasses and sins (Eph.2:1 AV). At that time I knew so little of the function of spirit, that the manifest absurdity of "spiritual" death was not apparent to me. But when I learned that life is the product of spirit, and death is due to the lack of spirit, it dawned upon me that there can be no such thing as "spiritual" death, for death is the most unspiritual thing in the universe. The Scriptures never use such an expression. Neither should we confuse life with

p255
Life comes from Spirit

consciousness. An unconscious tree has life.

     We cannot insist that only the spirit of Adam died, for in humanity it is the spirit that imparts and sustains life. The body has no life apart from it. Withdraw the spirit, and the whole man is dead. Adam did not die that day. The Hebrew is quite clear, if taken literally. "In the day you eat from it, to die shall you be dying" (CV). Adam became mortal that very day, just as all who descend from him undergo the dying process.

     It does not cease when one believes. Faith does not stop dying, it does not clothe with immortality. So the death that came to Adam, and that which characterizes the unbeliever as distinct from the believer, cannot be the same, and should not be called by the same name. Neither is spiritual. Adam's was literal. The sinner's is figurative. Just as he comes out of darkness into light, so he proceeds out of death into life. The process is a spiritual one because it is wrought by God's Spirit. Both certainly should not be called "spiritual" when one is due to the absence of spirit.


"SPIRITUAL LIFE"

     There is not nearly so much objection to the phrase "spiritual life," because life must come from spirit. Yet it is worthy of notice that the Scriptures never use this expression. To the Eastern mind it is tautological like wet rain, for there can be no life, even that possessed by the unbeliever, without spirit. We are so unaccustomed to the bold figures of the inspired records that we hesitate to use them. The figure, "into life," is all that is needed to convey the thought, just as "into light" does not need to be explained as "spiritual light." When we believe it is like coming out of darkness into light. It is not coming from one kind of

p256
Vivification, Past, Present and Future

light into another. And it is like proceeding out of death into life. It is not proceeding out of literal life into spiritual life.


OUR SPIRITUAL RESURRECTION BODY

     The use of the word "spiritual" in place of figurative has given rise to the idea that nothing corporeal can be spiritual. That this is not the case is evident from the Scriptures concerning the resurrection body. It is called a spiritual body (1 Cor.15:44). If we should say that we were roused and vivified spiritually in Christ, this may suggest that the spirit alone was involved. But rousing cannot take place without both body and spirit, for it comes only as a combination of the two.

     Vivification is always a "spiritual" act, because it is altogether the result of spirit, which alone gives life. We cannot say that we were vivified "spiritually" in Christ (Eph.2:5), or that our bodies are now vivified "spiritually" by God's Spirit which makes its home in us (Rom.8:11), in contrast to our future vivification, whenever that may be, for that must of necessity be even more spiritual, for our very bodies will then become spiritual. What confusion is created by this word!

     The difference between our vivification in the past and in the future is not that the former is spiritual and the latter unspiritual, but that the one in the past was figurative and the one in the future will be literal. The past is a matter of faith in the operation of God. The future will not require faith, for it will be a blessed and glorious experience, which will thrill our very being with life so abundant and exultant that our hearts will overflow with thanksgiving and praise to God. Moreover, the life will no longer be hid, as it is at pres-

p257
Spiritual Power in the Written Word

ent, but manifest in us to all the world. Now this is not the case. We wait for Christ. Whenever He, Who is our Life, should be manifested, then, and not before, shall we be manifested with Him in glory.
A.E.K.

[Tom]

http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V18P1 p69

THE DIVINE MYSTERIES


WHAT IS "THE MYSTERY?"

TO get at the very heart of the secret unfolded in Ephesians is a great spiritual achievement, far beyond the soulish man (1 Cor.2:14) and impossible to the fleshy saint (1 Cor.3:1-4). Perhaps the greatest hindrance is sectarianism. If we prefer to be partisans we cannot expect to enter into the deep things of God. So it has worked out in practice. The many divisions of Christendom vary in their apprehension of God's mind, but all of them utterly fail to grasp this secret, which, above all else, they ought to understand. It has become so mysterious that it is well called a "mystery," for such it is to all who do not keep the unity of the spirit.

     Even among those well advanced in truth, who have not shaken themselves entirely free of the shackles which once bound them, there is much misapprehension on this matter. Well do we remember the notable series of articles on this subject by Dr. Bullinger, full of much recently recovered truth. But even he made the mystery the body of Christ, as many spiritual divines, especially among the Puritans, had done before him. That position is well crystallized in the phrase "the mystical body of Christ." My own suspicions were aroused by the fact that no such phrase is found in Scripture. This led me to inquire what "the mystery" really is.

     After much study, I found the answer to my quest in the categorical statement of Ephesians 3:6. There it is defined for us so clearly and concisely that we need never be at a loss as to its precise provisions. There we are told that, in spirit, the nations are to be

p70
The Thrice Repeated Joint is the Key to the Mystery


       joint  enjoyers of an allotment, and a  joint  body,
  and  joint  partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus, through
               the evangel of which Paul became the dispenser.


     The Authorized Version rendering is "that the gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel:" This loose paraphrase is most lamentable, for it is more calculated to hide the secret than to reveal it. The revisers of 1611 certainly did not apprehend the mystery or they would not have made such a lame translation. In the original the word TOGETHER sun is thrice repeated. They render it well once by fellow. Yet it certainly does not mean same, as they have it before "body." They omit its third occurrence entirely. The late revision has remedied this by uniformly rendering TOGETHER by fellow each time, thus: "that the gentiles are fellow-heirs, and fellow-members of the body and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel."

     That the nations were to be heirs or allottees was no secret. Long before this Paul had written to the Roman saints: "For you did not get slavery's spirit again to fear, but you got the spirit of sonship, in which we are crying, `Abba, Father!' The same spirit joins its witness with our spirit that we are children of God. Yet if children, enjoyers also of an allotment, enjoyers indeed, of God's allotment..." (Rom.8:15-17). Similarly he expostulates with the Galatians: "Now, seeing that you are sons, God delegates the spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying `Abba, Father!' So that you are no longer a slave, but a son. Now if a son, an enjoyer also of God's allotment, through Christ" (Gal.4:6-8).

     That the saints among the nations were members of the body of Christ was no secret, for it was written: "For even as, in one body, we have many members, yet all the members have not the same function, thus we, who are many, are one body in Christ, yet severally

p71
The Thrice Repeated Joint is the Key to the Mystery

members of one another" (Rom.12:4,5). And again, to the Corinthians, Paul repeats: "For even as the body is one and has many members, yet all the members of the one body, being many, are one body, thus is the Christ also. For in one spirit we all are baptized into one body..." (1 Cor.12:12,13). At the time of Paul's Roman imprisonment the "one body" was well known.

     That the nations were partakers of His promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel was made known early in Paul's ministry. It is the burden of the latter half of the book of Acts. Writing to the Roman saints, speaking of the contribution about to be taken for the Jerusalem saints, Paul declares: "If the nations participate in their spiritual things, they ought to minister to them in fleshly things..." (Rom.15:27).

     Since the mystery evidently did not consist in being an "heir" or allottee, or in membership in the body of Christ, or in participation in the promise, wherein does it lie? Its whole point and force is found in that thrice-repeated word TOGETHER, fellow, or, as we have rendered it, joint. It lies in the fact that the nations no longer enjoyed these three blessings subordinate to the Circumcision. It puts them on the same footing, in the same rank, with the favored nation. It makes them the peers of that privileged people.

     The nations could not be joint alottees before because the allotment was on the earth and Israel must have the supreme position here. They must always be aliens from the earthly commonwealth (Eph.2:12). Hitherto they could not be members of a joint body because, as constituted before this, the members were of various rank, corresponding to our physical body. The head was much more exalted than the feet (1 Cor.12:21). So long as the nations were to be blessed with Israel on the earth, they could not be joint-participants. They could only be guests (Eph.2:12). The Jew was first (Rom.1:16;

p72
Joint Allottees, Joint Partakers

2:9). The nations were Israel's debtors (Rom.15:27).

     The secret reveals that the nations have been accorded an allotment, a membership in a body, and a partnership in the promise which Paul had preached, all in equal measure, in as high degree, and in every way the same as that given to the remnant of Israelites to whom they are united. This is the message of the small but emphatic prefix joint.

     These three distinct items of the mystery are each elaborated in the first two chapters of the Ephesian epistle. Ephesians 1:3-14 deals with the allotment or "inheritance," and concludes by giving the nations the same seal, the same spirit, hence the same allotment, as Paul and his fellow Israelites. Ephesians 1:20-2:10 deals with the one body, and shows that the nations are blessed in it equally with the Jews. Ephesians 2:11-22 shows that the physical inferiority of the nations no longer bars them from the fullest participation in the promise of Paul's evangel.

     Each of the three unfoldings of the mystery is concerned with a different relationship. The Godward side is seen in connection with the celestial allotment. It is concerned with our place in His predestination and plans and purpose. The Christward side comes before us in dealing with the joint body, of which He is the Head. The manward side of the mystery is developed in dealing with our joint participation with the saints.


JOINT-ALLOTTEES

     The Godward aspect of the mystery comes before us first (Eph.1:3-14). It is divided into two sections. In the first (1:3-12) the allotment of Paul and the Israelites associated with him is transferred from earth to heaven. Their blessedness is among the celestials. They reign, not on earth, but in the wider sphere of the universe. In the second section (1:13,14) the nations—"you also"—are

p73
Joint Allotment, Joint Partakers

accorded the same allotment because they have received the same spirit, and have the same pledge. Hence they are joint enjoyers of these celestial honors.


THE JOINT BODY

     The Christward side of the secret is developed next (Eph.1:20-2:10). First He, as the Head of the whole universe, is given His place above all. Then His body is introduced as the universal complement. Hitherto redemption had provided only for earth's lost blessings. Heaven, where sin started, was not, it seemed, to be reached by the work of the cross. The greater part of the universe was still unprovided for. Israel will be His instrument in earth's redemption. The ecclesia which is His body will supply what is needed in the heavens. Thus it is "the complement which is completing the entire universe." Christ, including the members of His body, will administer the government of the empyrean.

     What place will the nations have in this? On earth they must be the subjects of Israel. In the heavens, however, the celestials are the subjects. The body was made up of both Jew and gentile. In this new sphere, are the Jews to keep their superior place? They are not. First, the apostle addresses the nations—"And you" (2:1). In the third verse he turns to the Israelites—"among whom we." But both are included when He


               makes us alive together (2:5),
               rouses us together (2:6) and
               seats us together


among the celestials, in Christ Jesus. Hence the members are all of equal rank. It is a joint body.


JOINT PARTAKERS

     The manward mood of the mystery is the last to be elaborated (Eph.2:11-22). The distinction between Israel and the nations was a matter of flesh, summarized

p74
All is in Spirit, Nothing is in Flesh

in the rite of circumcision. This left them, even after they believed the evangel, ineligible to the citizenship of Israel, mere guests of the covenants, with no expectation or God of their own, as far as flesh is concerned. But now that they are joint allottees and members of a joint body, and all their blessings are spiritual, the fleshly disabilities vanish. As a result they are fellow citizens, and members of God's family and built together for God's dwelling place in spirit (Eph.2:19-22).

     It is of prime importance that we note the channel through which this grace flows. It is not that we are made "partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel:" (AV), but "joint partakers of His promise in Christ Jesus, through the evangel of which I [Paul] became the dispenser" (CV). The apostle is not so absurd as to inform the Ephesians, or any other saints to whom this epistle was sent, that he was a minister of the gospel! He is not telling that they are joint partakers through the evangel of the Circumcision, which was proclaimed by the twelve, for they never can be blessed on equal terms with Israel in her earthly kingdom. He is telling them that this grace comes to them through that evangel which he had been preaching to them, which he called "my evangel" (Rom.16:25), including the great truths of justification, conciliation, and glorification (Rom.3—8), which they had received, but which gave them a place subordinate to Israel in the flesh.

  Hitherto they had a standing "in flesh," or on the physical plane. They were the Uncircumcision, and as such must take a lower place than the Circumcision. They were bidden to remember that time (Eph.2:11,12). This does not refer (as the translators evidently thought, judging by their rendering) to that time when they were unbelievers or "unsaved." It refers to the time when they were partakers, but not joint partakers.

(continued in next post due to character limit)

[Tom]

p75
All is in Spirit, Nothing is in Flesh

Then they were guests of (not strangers to) the covenants of promise. This they could not be before they believed. From the physical standpoint (not from the spiritual) they had no expectation, for Israel monopolized that. They even had to acknowledge the Deity as the God of Israel. If they should be physically present in Jerusalem, all of this would be painfully apparent to them. No matter how great their spiritual attainments, they dared not enter the temple precincts beyond the court allotted to them. They were emphatically not joint partakers.

     But now that the secret is revealed the Jew is not shut out of the holy places nor is the gentile kept at a distance, but both, in spirit, enter into the holiest of all. The fact that a Jew is not of the seed of Aaron cannot keep him out. Though the gentile is not of the seed of Israel, that does not bar his approach. Physical disabilities vanish before spiritual graces.


IN SPIRIT

     We must not fail to emphasize the fact that every one of the three items of the mystery is modified by the introductory phrase, in spirit. All other translations I have ever seen join this with the preceding verb "revealed." They tell us that it was revealed "by the Spirit." There is little point to this, as that is the ordinary mode of revelation. Standing, as the word does, between two statements, either ending one or beginning another, it must be emphatic. Once we see how important it is as applied to the secret, we cannot but connect it with the mystery.

     The nations are not joint-allottees in flesh; they are not members of a joint body in flesh; they are not joint participants in flesh. It is only in spirit that all this is true. Physical preeminence belongs to Israel. Physically the nations can claim no equality. Carnal blessings

p76
Paul's Previous Evangel

have no place in Ephesians. They are not involved in the secret. We are blessed with all spiritual blessings among the celestials, hence the threefold divisions of the secret are all dominated by the opening phrase: in spirit.

     The nations are joint-enjoyers of the allotment because they were sealed with the holy spirit of promise, which was its earnest. They had a spiritual pledge of a spiritual portion (Eph.1:13). They are in the joint body because of the purely spiritual grace of being vivified and roused and seated together with a faithful remnant of Israel (Eph.2:5,6). The nations, once the Uncircumcision as to flesh, kept at a distance from the material temple at Jerusalem, now have access, together with them, in one spirit, to the Father (Eph.2:18).


PAUL'S EVANGEL

     Now that we have seen that the secret consists in a change from a subordinate place to a position of equality we will be able to judge its effect on previous revelation. As the allotment to Israel in the land will not brook any equality with the nations, an entirely new allotment is revealed, among the celestials. As the body of Christ was already in existence, a new body was unnecessary, but it was modified into a joint body. As the evangel Paul had preached was almost exclusively spiritual in its blessings it merely needed to drop a few physical phases to be the channel of the mystery.

     As we are distinctly told that joint participation comes through the evangel Paul had been preaching, it is of the utmost importance that we give it a place in the administration of the mystery. It continues in force. The promise it brought is not set aside, but is definitely incorporated into this secret economy. There are only such minor modification as the secret itself demands, due to the new destiny and the changed relations of the Jews and gentiles who come into its embrace.

p77
Justification Continues

     In his itinerant ministry Paul deemed it necessary to speak to the Jews first (Acts 13:46). The priority of the Jew is recognized, even in his previous writings. It is necessary to insist that this is no longer true, for it is contrary to the very essence of the secret now revealed. His previous teaching is modified by the addition of a celestial allotment and the withdrawal of all physical distinctions and blessing, for this is essential to the administration of the mystery.

     Paul's previous proclamations, as presented in his Preparatory and Promise epistles, may be summed up in three words, Justification, Conciliation and Glory. All three are the subjects of Romans, and its companion epistles, Corinthians and Galatians. The Thessalonian, epistles also bring in the future glory in connection with the coming of our Lord. The revelation of the mystery does not involve a reconsideration of these great doctrines, but assumes them, amplifies them, glorifies them. As they were all given to Paul after his separation from the rest, and in preparation for the secret economy about to be revealed, they are incorporated in it.


JUSTIFICATION

     The grand doctrine of justification is not repeated in Ephesians, rather it is recognized. In the panoply, provided for us in our conflict with the spiritual forces of wickedness among the celestials is the cuirass of righteousness. True, this is composed of our actual conduct. But apart from the enjoyment of justification such conduct is impossible.

     Philippians, the companion epistle of Ephesians, written to correct the conduct of those who come into the light of the mystery, clearly sets forth our connection with justification. There Paul eagerly grasps this grace. He had striven to attain to righteousness under the law. But now, "What things were gain to me, these I have deemed a forfeit because of Christ. But, to be sure, I am

p78
Jew and Gentile Reconciled

deeming all to be a forfeit because of the superiority of the knowledge of Christ Jesus, my Lord, because of Whom I forfeited all, and am deeming it to be refuse, that I may be gaining Christ, and may be found in Him, not having my righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is from God for faith..." Here we find the aged apostle, who doubtless apprehended the mystery as no one else ever did or could, resting on the firm foundation of justification by faith. It not only fails to conflict with the latest revelation, but is in fullest accord with it. It supplies the only basis on which it can be built.


THE CONCILIATION

     Romans records the great truth that God's attitude toward the nations has changed since Israel refuses to convey His blessing to them. God is conciliated to all mankind. Those who receive this are reconciled (Rom.5). Second Corinthians deals with the ministry of the conciliation (2 Cor.5:18-20). It is our point of contact with the world, for our feet are to be sandaled with the readiness of the evangel of peace (Eph.6:15). It also is a secret, "the Mystery of the Gospel" (Rom.16:25). The Colossians had accepted it and were reconciled (Col.1:21). Eventually it will be enjoyed by the whole universe (Col.1:20).

     In Ephesians this truth is amplified to accord with the mystery. Those near (the Jews) and those far off (the gentiles) are reconciled with God in one body (2:16). To both He preaches "the evangel of peace." Even the Israelite was shut out of the inner courts of the sanctuary and could not enter the temple building. Only the chief priest could enter the holiest of all. So that this evangel of peace, this conciliation, now has a message for them as well as for the nations. Both are brought nigh, in spirit, into the very Presence of the Father.

p79
The Future Glory


FUTURE GLORY

     The rendering "who first trusted in Christ" (Eph.1:12, AV). has practically eliminated all reference to the Lord's coming from the Ephesian epistle. Change "trust" to "expect" or even "hope," as the Revisers have it, and we have an important link which connects the mystery with the advent of our Lord as revealed in the Thessalonian epistles. It was the Circumcision who first trusted in Christ not the nations. And of these Paul was among the last, not the first. But he and the nations expected the return of Christ before His coming to the earth. They had a prior expectancy. This is revealed in Thessalonians.

     Peter and James and John show conclusively, by their epistles, that they never received the truth contained in Paul's writings. The advent of our Lord for them was just the same as the prophets had foretold, and our Lord had predicted, and as they themselves had proclaimed in the Acts. It was to be a glorious manifestation to His people Israel, resulting in the millennial kingdom. Such an expectation leaves no place for a celestial destiny such as Ephesians unfolds.

     But those to whom Paul had gone with his evangel did not expect to wait until Messiah should come in glory to the Mount of Olives. Paul had said to them by the word of the Lord, that they would be gathered together unto Him (2 Thess.2:1) when He shall be present in the air before His wrath is visited upon the earth (1 Thess.4:15-18; 5:9). That it was "by the word of the Lord" shows that it was one of those truths which enabled him to speak of "my evangel," and so is included in the third item of the mystery. This surely was a "promise in Christ Jesus, through the evangel" of which he became the dispenser (Eph.3:6,7).

     The nations are now joint partakers of this promise (Eph.3:6). But, were they not joint partakers when

p80
From Glory to Glory

Thessalonians was written? The key lies in the title used. It is the coming of the Lord (not Christ). Peter makes this distinction when speaking to Cornelius. "Of the word He dispatches to the sons of Israel, preaching the evangel of peace through Jesus Christ (He is Lord of all), you are aware." Here we find the nations connected with Him as Lord, just as in the prophets they are connected with Adonai, and not Jehovah. So we find that Messiah, or Christ, is connected with Israel. At that time, the nations, in flesh, were "apart from Christ," (Eph.2:12)

     In keeping with this lower plane of blessing, the Thessalonians were told of the coming of the Lord to the air (not heaven). The fifteenth of first Corinthians adds to our knowledge of this event. It initiates us into the secret of the resurrection. In it we are told that our bodies will not only be raised, but changed—changed to a celestial body. Why is this? Philippians supplies the answer: "Our citizenship belongs to the heavens, out of which we are awaiting a Saviour also, the Lord, Jesus Christ, Who will transfigure the body of our humiliation, to conform it to His body glorious..." Resurrection, change, ascension, transfiguration, glory.

     In describing his ministry the apostle compares himself with Moses. Moses put a veil on his face that the sons of Israel should not see the consummation of that which is vanishing. He did not hide the glory from them, but the fact that it was a fading glory. It changed from glory to gloom. Paul's ministry does not do this. It leads in the opposite direction. It is continually gathering new glory. "Now we all, with uncovered face, viewing the Lord's glory as in a mirror, are transformed into the same image, from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the spirit" (2 Cor.3:18).

     So it was with our precious expectation. It began in grace. All were to be snatched away, whether watching

p81
The Secret was Concealed

or drowsing (1 Thess.5:10). It will change our bodies from soilish to celestial at the sound of His trump. But even celestial bodies vary in glory. There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars, for star excels star in glory (1 Cor.15:41). Not content with mere celestial glory, we are to excel the very sun itself, even as the glorified Christ outshone its Syrian noonday brilliance when Paul first met Him on the Damascus road. We are to be transfigured into the body of His glory.

     Some of the saints do not believe there is any secret in this epistle at all because Paul assured the Ephesians, on his last visit to them, that he did not shrink from informing them of anything which is expedient (Acts 20:20). The last word is usually rendered "profitable" in this passage, though the Authorized Version itself often translates it "expedient" (John 11:50; 16:7; 18:14; 1 Cor.6:12; 10:23; 2 Cor.8:10; 12:1). This word is the key to the fact that the secret was withheld until after Paul's imprisonment and the setting aside of Israel. So long as God was still dealing with the nation of His choice, he could reveal much of His grace to the nations in preparation for the transcendent revelations which were to follow. But it would have been most confusing and unwise, as well as unfair to Israel, to announce the new administration while the hope of the kingdom was still held out to them. Paul could not reveal this secret when passing by Ephesus, and it is for this reason that he qualifies his statement by this expression. He did not inform them of everything, but everything which is expedient.

     A little later, in the same discourse, he almost repeats himself. He did not shrink from informing them of the entire counsel of God (Acts 20:27). God's counsel is always distinctly limited to His public revelation. When the lawyers repudiated the counsel of God for themselves (Luke 7:30), they were concerned only with what

p82
Full Equality

was open to all. They could not reject a divine secret which had not been revealed. So Paul fully expounded so much as was due of God's counsel. The secret was not yet due. It was not yet true. In Acts Paul takes the saints up to it. In Ephesians he takes them through it.

     This question resolves itself into a simple matter of faith. Shall we believe both Acts and Ephesians, or shall we pit one against the other and thus destroy both? Ephesians refers to a later time. Paul says it is a secret. Faith immediately concludes that he did not make it known before. Faith then examines his words in Acts and finds that he did not claim to divulge the secret then, but was speaking of the truth which was applicable to that era.

     In order to prepare the saints among the nations for the secret it was expedient that they be fully informed of God's dealings with Israel and the nations up to the time when the mystery itself could be made known. While Israel was apostatizing they lost their hold on God's counsel. They were being prepared for dismissal. But the believers among the gentiles were taken into God's confidence as far as possible under the circumstances. This is what Paul speaks of on his last journey past Ephesus.

     To sum up: The "mystery," or secret, of the present administration is not the revelation of "the one body," sometimes called "the mystical body" of Christ. It is concerned with this in one of its three aspects. It changes it from a body with members of various rank to a joint body, the members all of equal rank. After the revelation of the celestial allotment for those associated with Paul's ministry, the status of the nations, or gentiles, is changed from subordination to the Circumcision to full equality. Together, both are raised to the highest place in the universe. "To Him be glory in the ecclesia and in Christ Jesus for all the generations of the eon of the eons! Amen!"
A. E. K.

[Shev]

I think everybody experiences the futility of trying to save themselves, not just the Jewish people, even those who follow orthodox theology, and even those who are unbelievers. The Jewish people will be blessed with their promised kingdom of the heavens in Israel with Messiah that is the hope of all the Jewish people, and all the nations on earth will come to God through Israel. So it's not just the law that demonstrates the futility of man trying to save himself, but the pride of all men. The Jewish believers kept their law, but Paul preached an evangel apart from law to the nations. We're not subject to the law, never have been, and never will be because we weren't given the law even though orthodox theology teaches that. I think some people have come to believe in the salvation of all mankind, but are still deceived by other beliefs of orthodox theology. There are variations of doctrine in Christendom. That's why there are so many denominations. I think the church thinking its spiritual Israel is a prime example. I think God has simply chosen one group of people to do his will on earth in the coming eon while another group is doing his will in the celestial realm, and eventually God will be all in all. So I don't think the Jewish people got a bad deal, as has been said, because God blesses everybody according to his will.

So do you actually believe the Jews have kept the law?

After three days [m]Paul called together those who were the leading men of the Jews, and when they came together, he began saying to them, "Brethren, though I had done nothing against our people or the customs of our [n]fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans. 18 And when they had examined me, they were willing to release me because there was no ground

• for putting me to death. 19 But when the Jews [p]objected, I was forced to appeal to Caesar, not that I had any accusation against my nation. 20 For this reason, therefore, I [q]requested to see you and to speak with you, for I am wearing this chain for the sake of the hope of Israel." 21 They said to him, "We have neither received letters from Judea concerning you, nor have any of the brethren come here and reported or spoken anything bad about you. 22 But we desire to hear from you what [r]your views are; for concerning this sect, it is known to us that it is spoken against everywhere."
  
  23 When they had set a day for Paul, they came to him at his lodging in large numbers; and he was explaining to them by solemnly testifying about the kingdom of God and trying to persuade them concerning Jesus, from both the Law of Moses and from the Prophets, from morning until evening. 24 Some were being persuaded by the things spoken, but others would not believe. 25 And when they did not agree with one another, they began leaving after Paul had spoken one parting word, "The Holy Spirit rightly spoke through Isaiah the prophet to your fathers, 26 saying,
  
  'Go to this people and say,
  "You will keep on hearing, [t]but will not understand;
  And you will keep on seeing, but will not perceive;
  For the heart of this people has become dull,
  And with their ears they scarcely hear,
  And they have closed their eyes;
  Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
  And hear with their ears,
  And understand with their heart and return,
  And I would heal them."'
  
  28 Therefore let it be known to you that this salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles; they will also listen." 29 [[v]When he had -spoken these words, the Jews departed, having a great dispute among themselves.] (Acts 28:17-29)
  
  In this passage in Acts, Paul says that he is in chains for the sake of the hope of Israel. If he had the 'evangel of the uncircumcision' this statement would not be true, but it would be rather Peter who was laboring for the hope of Israel. Paul goes on to show that the same salvation of God that the Jews are deaf to, is being sent to the Gentiles, who will listen.
  

[Tom]

I think Jesus was the only Jew able to keep the law.

I think it's God's plan that most of the Jewish people be blind to the truth until all those chosen are called out of the nations.

"God gives them a spirit of stupor, eyes not to be observing, and ears not to be hearing, till this very day." (Romans 11:8)

"For I am not willing for you to be ignorant of this secret, brethren, lest you may be passing for prudent among yourselves, that callousness, in part, on Israel has come, until the complement of the nations may be entering." (Romans 11:25)

[Tom]

http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V19P2 p275

STUDIES IN ACTS


THE COUNCIL AT JERUSALEM

IN the first part of the eleventh division of the Structure of the Acts we have an interlude preparatory to Paul's ministry in association with the twelve. This may be further structurized as follows:


186[1]: 14:28. Paul and Barnabas tarry in Antioch.
  187[1]: 15:1-2-. Antioch. Paul's and Barnabas' ministry opposed
                   by some from Judas.
     188[1]: 15:-2-4. Paul, Barnabas, and others commissioned to
                      appeal to Jerusalem.
       189[1]: 15:5-11. Jerusalem Council. Peter defends Paul's
                        and Barnabas' ministry.
          190: 15:12. Paul and Baranbas tell of their ministry
                      among the nations.
       189[2]: 15:13-21. Jerusalem Council. James enjoins a com-
                         promise upon the ministry of Paul and
                         Barnabas.
     188[2]:15:22-31. Paul, Barnabas, Judas, and Silas bring
                      answer from Jerusalem.
  187[2]: 15:32-34. Antioch. Paul's and Barnabas' ministry upheld
                    by two from Jerusalem.
186[2]: 15:35. Paul and Barnabas tarry in Antioch.


     After Paul and Barnabas' return to Antioch from their first missionary journey, they tarried there among the disciples. "Now they tarried no short time with the disciples" (Acts 14:28). While we are not told so here, undoubtedly, they occupied their time as in the corresponding Section 186[2] (15:35) in "teaching and preaching the evangel of the word of the Lord."

     Next we read, "And some, coming down from Judea, taught the brethren that, `If you should not be circumcised after the custom of Moses you cannot be saved.'

p276
The Conflict of Faith and Grace versus Law and Works

Now as Paul and Barnabas come to have no slight commotion and questioning with them..." (15:1-2-). The door of faith had just been unlocked to the nations. The disciples at Antioch had scarcely been informed of this fact, when Judaisers came down from Judea intent upon locking the door of faith again. Whereas Paul and Barnabas had reported to the ecclesia of Antioch that, as the result of their ministry, it was no longer necessary for the gentiles to become even proselytes of the gate in order to obtain salvation, these Judaisers not only contradicted this teaching but maintained that even proselytes of the gate (like Cornelius) could not be saved unless they should be circumcised, and thereby become proselytes of righteousness, obligated to fulfill all the requirements of the law of Moses. In this ever-recurring conflict between faith and grace versus law and works, Paul and Barnabas zealously championed the cause of faith and grace. Paul's epistle to the Galatians indicates the argument and reasoning used in refuting the false teachings of these Judaising opponents.

     As a result of this contention, Paul, Barnabas, and some others were commissioned to appeal the case to higher authorities. "They prescribe that Paul and Barnabas and some others from among them are to go up into Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question. They, indeed, then, being sent forward by the ecclesia, passed through Phoenicia as well as Samaria, detailing the turning about of the nations. And they caused great joy to all the brethren. Now, coming along into Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the ecclesia and the apostles and the elders, and they inform them of whatever God does with them" (15:-2-4).

     At Babel, in the plains of Shinar, the nations had rebelled against God. There they sought to make a name for themselves. There they definitely turned away from God. So God had set them aside, and selected Abraham to be the father of a new nation, through whom alone

p277
The Conflict of Faith and Grace versus Law and Works

He had dealings thereafter. The nations were hence-forth far off, but now they were "turning about," and were returning to God and a life of obedience to Him. This is the story that brought "great joy to all the brethren."

     We are not told that there was any opposition from Judaisers during this journey to Jerusalem, yet neither are we told that anything was said about the opening of the door of faith to the nations. The latter was the cause of all the opposition of the Judaisers. "The turning about of the nations" (to a Judaiser) would suggest the taking up of the yoke of Judaism. Upon arriving in Jerusalem, the delegates from the ecclesia of Antioch were cordially received by the ecclesia and the apostles and the elders. Now Paul and Barnabas make known "whatever God does with them." That would include the information that the door of faith had been opened to the nations. Immediately opposition develops!

     We have the recital of this opposition in the next section of this narrative (15:5-11): "Yet some from the sect of the Pharisees, who have believed, rise up, saying that "They must be circumcised, besides charging them to keep the law of Moses. Now the apostles and elders were assembled to see about this matter. Now, there coming to be much questioning, Peter, standing up, said to them, Men! Brethren! You are versed in the fact that from early days God chooses among you, that through my mouth the nations are to hear the word of the evangel and believe. And God, the Knower of hearts, testifies to them, giving the holy spirit even as to us, and does not discriminate at all between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. Why, then, are you now trying God, by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we have the strength to bear? But through the grace of the Lord Jesus we are believing, to be saved in a manner even as they!"

     The contention of the believing Pharisees of Jeru-

p278
The Menace of the Present is Apostasy from Paul

salem that believers from among the nations must be circumcised and keep the law of Moses shows that the opposition of the Judaisers, at Antioch, was not an isolated event. Paul speaks of them as "false brethren who were smuggled in, who crept in to spy out our freedom which we have in Christ Jesus that they shall be enslaving us" (Gal.2:4). Evidently this opposition to Paul's evangel was very widespread among Jewish believers. Apparently there was great danger that Paul's ministry and evangel might be overthrown, not only at Antioch, but everywhere, through the pernicious work of these Judaisers. Hence, not only was Paul delegated by the ecclesia of Antioch to go to Jerusalem about this matter, but God interfered on behalf of the evangel of the Uncircumcision, for Paul states, of this journey to Jerusalem, "Now I went up in accord with a revelation, and submitted to them the evangel which I am proclaiming to the nations" (Gal.2:2).

     The Judaisers did not comprehend that Paul's evangel, the evangel of the Uncircumcision, was a distinct revelation from God, and was vitally different from the evangel of the twelve, the evangel of the Circumcision. How strenuously Paul insisted upon these distinctions! Yet the church of the present day is in large part almost as Judaistic in its evangel and doctrines as were these opponents of Paul. True, the rite of circumcision is not decreed, but, with this exception, the evangel and doctrines of Paul for the nations have been displaced by the evangel and doctrines of the twelve for the earthly kingdom. Faith has fallen before law or legalism; grace has withdrawn before the teaching of works; the doctrine of "eternal security," of this economy, is discarded for the "holding out to the end" doctrine of the Pentecostal economy and the earthly kingdom era; celestial position and spiritual blessings are ignored, while we seek to rob Israel of its terrestrial position and physical blessings, heedless of Paul's inspired statement, "even if we or a

p279
The Menace of the Present is Apostasy from Paul

messenger out of heaven should be preaching an evangel to you beside that which we preach to you, let him be anathema! As we have declared before and at present, I say again, if anyone is preaching to you an evangel beside that which you accepted, let him be anathema" (Gal.1:8,9)!

     Oh, the need of a clarion voice to recall the saints of this secret economy from the teachings of the four gospels and the writings of the twelve apostles and their Circumcision brethren! I say this advisedly, for these Scriptures, which are absolutely true when applied to the kingdom believers and the eras to which they belong, become perniciously false and misleading when applied to the nations and to this present secret economy! Truth misplaced is the most subtle form of error, and Satan has used these kingdom truths to propagate his false teachings among the saints. And has he been successful? Let us answer this question with another: How many of the saints see that present truth is found in the Pauline epistles only? Yes, Satan has been successful in deceiving the church! The great apostasy is rampant everywhere. The truth for the nations, committed to Paul, is rejected and replaced by kingdom truth. So widespread is this apostasy, that a trumpet is needed even to recall the so-called fundamentalists from the kingdom truth to the Pauline doctrines!

     A council of apostles and elders had convened in Jerusalem to listen to the appeal of the Antiochian ecclesia concerning the question of the open door of faith to the nations, and the place of circumcision among gentile believers. But, before this council convened, Paul privately made known his evangel to James, Cephas, and John, and thus gained their recognition of his apostleship to the Uncircumcision (See Gal.2:6-10). If he had not first made known the essential points of his evangel to these pillars of the Jerusalem ecclesia, it is doubtful whether the Jerusalem council would have upheld Paul

p280
"Faith" based on Miracles

in his contention that circumcision should not be enjoined upon the gentiles who received his evangel. After considerable debate and questioning among those present at this council, Peter arose in defense of Paul's attitude toward circumcision as applied to the nations. Peter reminds the assembled brethren that from among them (the kingdom believers) God had chosen him to bring the evangel to the nations. He has reference to his call to proclaim the evangel to Cornelius, the gentile proselyte of the gate. He reminds them that God is the Knower of hearts, and that, therefore, He knows whether there is faith in the heart or not. Thus God had given the holy spirit to Cornelius and his gentile household and friends, and had cleansed their hearts in response to the faith that He discerned within them. God had not discriminated between the Circumcision and the Uncircumcision. Why should they discriminate? Such was Peter's argument. Then he assures them that they are trying God by placing a yoke upon the nations which none of the Circumcision had ever been able to bear; for the law of Moses only condemns. It cannot save because of the weakness of the flesh; and circumcision would make the nations "a debtor to do the whole law" (Gal.5:3).

     Finally, Peter boldly tells his brethren of the Circumcision that even they were not saved by law-keeping or by circumcision, but by grace, through faith, even as these gentile believers of Paul's evangel. These brave words of Peter, which were probably scorned and rejected by many in that council, and only comprehended or obeyed by a few, are his last recorded words in the Acts of the Apostles. Peter's contention is that God's dealings with Cornelius through grace and faith was an intimation of that ministry to which Paul and Barnabas had been separated on behalf of the nations.

     Then Paul and Barnabas tell of their ministry among the nations. "Now the entire multitude hushes, and they heard Barnabas and Paul unfolding whatever signs and

p281
James Usurps Authority

miracles God does among the nations through them."

     The faith of the Circumcisionists, as Paul and Barnabas were well aware, was not the same kind of faith as that which brought salvation to the gentile believers of Paul's evangel. Their faith was the same kind of faith that we read of in John 2:23-25, "Many believe into His name, beholding the signs which He did. Yet Jesus Himself did not entrust Himself to them, because He knows all, and He had no need that anyone should be testifying concerning mankind, for He knew what was in mankind." Their faith was based on signs and miracles. When these ceased, their faith failed. Hence Paul and Barnabas, in their recital of God's work through them on behalf of the nations, dwell on the "signs and miracles God does among the nations through them." This was the only language these Circumcisionists understood; true faith, such as saved and cleansed the gentiles, was beyond their comprehension. And so it was necessary, in order to win the approval of this assembly of Judaisers, to speak of the signs and miracles, rather than the evidences of saving and cleansing faith among the nations.

     Now James, the brother of our Lord, reveals that, though not an apostle, he has the paramount influence among the believers in Jerusalem simply because of his fleshly relationship to our Lord. "Now after they hush James answered, saying, `Men! Brethren! Hear me!' Simeon unfolds how God first visits the nations, to obtain out of them a people for His name." And with this the words of the prophets are agreeing, according as it is written,


"`After this I will return,
  And I will rebuild the tabernacle of David which has fallen,
  And its overturned structure will I rebuild,
  And I will re-erect it,
  So that those left of mankind should be seeking the Lord,
  And all the nations over whom My name has been invoked,
  The Lord is saying, Who is doing these things."

(continued in next post due to character limit)

[Tom]

p282
God Visits the Nations to Get a People for His Name

Known to the Lord is His work from the eon. Wherefore I decide not to be harassing those from the nations who are turning back to God, but to dispatch an epistle to them to be abstaining from ceremonial pollution with idols, and prostitution, and that which is strangled, and blood. For Moses, from ancient generations, as suits a city, has those who are proclaiming him, being read every sabbath in the synagogues.'"

     Peter was the chief apostle of the Circumcision, and had been commissioned by the Lord to feed and shepherd His flock, yet his spiritual advice is ignored by the Jerusalem council. Now James, the Lord's brother, who holds his place of ascendancy simply because of fleshly relationship, speaks to these fleshly, legalistic, apostatizing believers, and calls upon them to hear him. He reminds them that Peter had told them how God first visited "the nations, to obtain out of them a people for His name," citing the prophecy of Amos 9:11,12 as in harmony therewith. This prophecy speaks of the time when the kingdom is to be set up on this earth. At that time, when David's tabernacle is restored, those left of mankind, after the terrific judgments which precede that day, shall seek the Lord. Among the nations at that time will be those who, like Cornelius, had invoked the name of the Lord. These will be blessed with Israel in that kingdom. The fleshly James does not perceive that the gentile ecclesias, gathered together by the ministry of Paul and Barnabas, were not to be a part of this earthly kingdom. He assumes that they will be, but God does not permit him to say that this is a fulfillment of the prophets, but constrains him to say "with this the words of the prophets are agreeing." It was in harmony with the prophets, but it was not a fulfillment of them.

     That these gentile assemblies were destined for a celestial destiny was hidden until Israel had rejected the kingdom and was judicially blinded, at the close of the Acts.

p283
God Visits the Nations to Get a People for His Name

     Attention is called to the fact that the Lord Who fulfills all His word knows all His works from the inception of the eon. Nothing ever takes Him by surprise. Then James renders his decision, "Wherefore, I decide." He does not consult Peter or the rest of the apostles. He gives his decision as final, and as such it is accepted by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem, for even Peter was afraid of him (Gal.2:11-21). James' decision was a compromise which catered to the fleshly leading of Israel. He reminds his hearers that Moses now, as always, is taught in the synagogues of every city on the sabbath day, so that any gentile that desires to do so can be circumcised and become a proselyte of righteousness. But he decides that those who had received the ministry of Paul and Barnabas are not to be harassed and compelled to be circumcised, but that an epistle is to be dispatched "to them to be abstaining from ceremonial pollution with idols, and prostitution, and that which is strangled, and blood." These decrees (see Acts 16:4) were evidently intended to make possible social intercourse between Jewish and gentile believers. Though not against the law of Moses, it was forbidden by their tradition, which carried more weight with the average Jew than their divinely given law. A Jewish believer could not eat with a gentile believer if an idol sacrifice, strangled meat, or blood was served at the meal. And so James' decision left the Jewish believers under the bondage of the divine law, greatly intensified in its severity by their traditions, and put the gentile believers of Paul's evangel under a human law, "the law of precepts in the decrees" (Eph.2:15). When the full truth for this secret economy was revealed these decrees were nullified and erased and taken away, the cross being proclaimed as the ground of this liberation. But, as long as they remained in force, they were a sign of Israel's political supremacy, and proclaimed the nations as a subject people (Eph.2:15; Col.2:14).

p284
The Decrees for the Nations

     In the next section of the structure we have Jerusalem's answer to the ecclesia at Antioch. "Then it seems good to the apostles and the elders, together with the whole ecclesia, choosing men from among them, to send to Antioch together with Paul and Barnabas, Judas, who is called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren, writing through their hand: `The apostles and elders and brethren to the brethren out of the nations at Antioch, and Syria and Cilicia: Rejoice! Since, in fact, we hear that some coming out from us disturb you by words, dismantling your souls, whom we do not commission, it seems good to us, coming to be of one accord, choosing men, to send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have given up their souls for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have, then, commissioned Judas and Silas, and they are reporting the same by word. For it seems good to the holy spirit and to us not to be placing one more burden on you more than these essentials: to be abstaining from idol sacrifice, and blood, and what is strangled, and prostitution; from which, carefully keeping yourselves, you will be well engaged. Farewell!' They indeed, then, being dismissed, came down to Antioch, and, assembling the multitude, hand them the epistle. Now on reading it, they rejoiced at the consolation" (Acts 15:22-31).

     After James had announced his decision to the Jerusalem council we read of the choosing of Judas and Silas, as Jerusalem's representatives, to go back to Antioch, with Paul and Barnabas, as the bearers of the epistle and the decrees from Jerusalem. The record reads that the action taken seemed "good to the apostles and the elders, together with the whole ecclesia." That is to say, James, whose acknowledged claim to the Lord was according to the flesh, prevailed over Peter and the rest of the twelve, whose claim to the Lord was according to spirit. And "the elders" and "the whole ecclesia" agreed with James. The flesh was gaining an irre-

p285
The Ascendancy of the Flesh

sistible ascendancy over the spirit in the Jerusalem ecclesia, which was the center of the kingdom hope. Thus we have here another indication of the hopelessness of that hope. Another indication of the ascendancy of the flesh in the Jerusalem ecclesia is seen in the relative position given throughout the fifteenth chapter to Paul and Barnabas.

     Let us remember that Barnabas was a Levite (4:36,37). This would give him a higher standing, according to flesh, than Paul. But in the ecclesia of Antioch, where the spirit prevailed, Paul is given first place (Acts 15:2, twice). Before the Jerusalem council, where the flesh prevailed, Barnabas is given first place. In the divine record of what was done in the council's epistle, Barnabas is given first place, again indicating the ascendancy of the flesh over spirit in Jerusalem (verse 26). In Antioch we again find the spirit's order; Paul is given first place (verse 35). In verses 36-39, Paul evidently is the leader. In verse 40 we read that Paul and Silas are commended to God's grace by the ecclesia of Antioch. There is divine silence as to their attitude toward Barnabas and Mark. Thus consistently the relative positions of these two apostles are reversed. Antioch and God's spirit give Paul first place; Jerusalem, under the ascendancy of the flesh, gives Barnabas, the Levite, the place of prominence.

     The council's epistle is addressed to the brethren in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia (verse 23). Thus, technically, these decrees applied only to these saints, although their influence probably extended to all the saints among the nations. They were legalistic and did not harmonize with Paul's evangel of grace. They put the nations, who were under grace, not under law, under human decrees. At the close of the Acts period, after Israel was judicially set aside, Paul writes to the Colossians, "If, then, you died together with Christ from the elements of the world, why, as living in the world, are you subject to the

p286
The Decrees are no longer Binding

decree: `You should not be touching, nor tasting, nor having the slightest contact' (which is all for corruption by use) in accord with the directions and teachings of men, which are, indeed, an expression having its wisdom in a willful ritual and a humble disposition and asceticism not of any value against the surfeiting of the flesh" (Col.2:20,23). While this does not refer to these Jerusalem decrees, it does reveal how incompatible are any man-made decrees and prohibitions with this economy of grace. We are to refrain from sin and all that is unworthy, not because man prohibits, but because grace constrains.

     In 1 Corinthians 8 Paul sets forth the spirit's directions concerning the eating of meats offered to idols. The Jerusalem decrees prohibit; the spirit leaves it a question of individual conscience. After Israel forfeits its political and religious supremacy over the nations, at the close of the Acts period, Paul reveals the full truth for this economy. The cross nullifies and repeals the Jerusalem "law of precepts in decrees," for the distinctions between Jew and gentile, upon which they were based, no longer exist. All are one in Christ Jesus, therefore, the Jew no longer exercises political or religious supremacy over the gentile (Eph.2:15; Col.2:14).

     In verse 24 the Jerusalem council acknowledges that the Judaisers in Antioch, with their Judaistic teachings, dismantled the souls of the saints, for these legalistic teachings stripped their souls of the peace, rest and quietness with which the grace of the Pauline evangel had clothed them. Furthermore, this epistle says of these Judaisers, "whom we do not commission," thus settling the question that circumcision is not essential to salvation. Titus, whom Paul had taken along as a test case, returns with Paul to Antioch, uncircumcised (Gal.2:1-3). But the Judaisers were not so easily defeated. Henceforth they change their teaching to the more subtle doctrine that circumcision, while not essential to salva-

p287
Legalism, the Galatian Heresy

tion, is necessary in order to obtain a higher standing before God, and a closer, more vital relationship to Him. This legalism, that aught that man can do through or upon the flesh, can add to his perfection before God, is still very widespread among the saints, and is answered fully in the Galatian epistle.

     This Jerusalem epistle speaks of "Barnabas and Paul, men who have given up their souls for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ" (verse 26). This sounds strange to many because of the common misconception that the soul is the spiritual entity of man, practically synonymous with life. The soul is sensation. Through it we sense things pleasant and unpleasant as ease, peace, joy, sorrow, pain, and deprivations of all kinds. When the apostles gave up their souls for the name of the Lord Jesus Christ they did not give up their spiritual entity, but they laid their souls or sensations upon the altar, forfeiting all their rights to the pleasant sensations of a life of ease, and enduring all manner of deprivations and sufferings for His name's sake.

     After calling attention to their commissioners, Judas and Silas, this epistle concludes by enjoining the decrees which the nations are to observe (verses 27-29). It is to be noted that this epistle claims that this "burden" was placed upon the nations because "it seems good to the holy spirit and to us." It would have been more honorable for this flesh-controlled council to assume responsibility for their fleshly decision, instead of trying to place the responsibility upon the holy spirit which they had wholly ignored. How often has history repeated itself, in this respect, in the history of Christendom! Man-made burdens and precepts are ascribed to the holy spirit, and the saints are robbed of their freedom in Christ; they are "again enthralled with the yoke of slavery" (Gal.5:1).

     This section closes with the dismissal of Paul, Barnabas, and the Jerusalem commissioners, Judas and

p288
Israel's Political Supremacy

Silas; the return to Antioch; the assembling of the ecclesia; the reading of the epistle to the ecclesia, and the consequent rejoicing because of the information that circumcision is not essential to salvation (verses 30,31).

     Then we see how these two commissions from Jerusalem uphold Paul and Barnabas' ministry (verses 32-34). "Both Judas and Silas, being also prophets themselves, entreated and established the brethren by many a word. Now, the time being spent, they were dismissed with peace from the brethren to those who commission them." In the corresponding section (15:1-2-), self-constituted representatives from Judas oppose Paul and Barnabas' ministry. Now Judas and Silas, prophets and authorized commissioners from Jerusalem, entreated and established the brethren along the lines of Paul and Barnabas' ministry. Thereafter they are dismissed, with peace, to those who commission them. Some manuscripts then insert verse 34, "But it seemed good unto Silas to abide there." Even if this verse is not a part of the Scriptures, it is evident from the context, that Silas did remain in Antioch.

     This, the first part of the eleventh division of the structure of the Acts, closes with verse 35. "Yet Paul and Barnabas tarried in Antioch, teaching and preaching the evangel of the word of the Lord, with many others also." It is the preparatory interlude to Paul and Barnabas' ministry in association with the twelve apostles.

     Henceforth, the political supremacy of Israel is acknowledged by the believers from among the nations. So in the earlier Pauline epistles everything is to the Jew first (Rom.1:16; 2:9,10). The Jew had an advantage over the gentiles (Rom.3:1,2). From Acts 14:28 to 28:29 Paul, association with the twelve, proclaims the evangel of the kingdom to the Jews of the dispersion, and the evangel of God to the gentiles and Jews who would receive it, while the twelve proclaimed the evangel

p289
Notes on Translation

of the kingdom to the Circumcision in the land of Israel.

     While in Macedonia and Greece (20:2-3-) Paul revealed the conciliation in his writing of the epistles of Romans and 2 Corinthians. This ended Israel's religious supremacy. But their political supremacy continued until judicial blindness is pronounced upon Israel at the close of the Acts period (Acts 28:24-29). Then their political supremacy also ceases, and the nations are informed, in Paul's prison epistles, of their celestial sphere of blessing, and the absolute equality of Jewish and gentile believers in this economy, while Israel is apostate.
H. W. MARTIN

[Dandelion]

How can anyone know where they will be if they don't know what their genes are? and what about half Jewish people? Why doesn't the New Testament address the issue of the destiny of mixed races?

I think Paul was pure Jewish, even though he's in the body of Christ, and he and his Jewish brothers who are also in the body of Christ will be snatched away with those of us who aren't Jewish simply because we've all been chosen to believe in salvation in grace through faith. I also believe lots of people who lived before there even were any Jews won't be snatched away to meet Christ in the air, but they'll be subject to the kingdom of the heavens.

...27For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise. Galatians 3:27 - 29

[Tom]

"I am entreating you, then, I, the prisoner in the Lord, to walk worthily of the calling with which you were called, with all humility and meekness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity of the spirit with the tie of peace: one body and one spirit, according as you were called also with one expectation of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, Who is over all and through all and in all." (Ephesians 4:1-6)

[Tom]

http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V87P2 p181

STUDIES IN GALATIANS


THE EVANGEL OF
THE UNCIRCUMCISION
(Galatians 2:6-14)

IN Galatians 2:3, Paul refers to the time when "not even Titus, who is with me, being a Greek, is compelled to be circumcised." This was during the period of Paul's second visit to the holy city, after the lapse of fourteen years, when he again went up to Jerusalem together with Barnabas, taking Titus along with him (2:1). Yet while not even Titus, who was with Paul, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised, Paul adds that nonetheless, "it was because of the false brethren who were smuggled in, who came in by the way to spy out our freedom which we have in Christ Jesus, that they shall be enslaving us—" (2:4). That is—and the sense is so evident that Paul breaks off his words without actually expressing his thought—it was because of the claims (cp Acts 15:1,2,5) of certain "false brethren" that Titus was then pressed by some to be circumcised, even though even these could not well compel him to undergo the rite, contrary to the counsel of the pillars of the Jerusalem ecclesia.

     Now from those reputed to be somewhat—what kind they once were is of no consequence to me (God is not taking up the human aspect)—for to me those of repute submitted nothing. But, on the contrary, perceiving that I have been entrusted with the evangel of the Uncircumcision, according as Peter of the Circumcision (for He Who operates in Peter for the apostleship of the Circumcision operates in me also for the nations), and, knowing the grace which is being given to me, James and Cephas and John, who are supposed to be pillars, give to me and Barnabas the

p182
Paul's Evangel Needs no Addition

right hand of fellowship, that we, indeed, are to be for the nations, yet they for the Circumcision—only that we may be remembering the poor, which same thing I endeavor also to do (2:6-10).

     In speaking of the twelve as "those reputed to be somewhat," Paul should not be understood as disparaging them. Paul does not refer to any exalted claims which the twelve made for themselves, but to those advanced in favor of the twelve by the circumcisionists, in the interests of their own legalistic devisings.

     Those who were apostles before Paul "submitted nothing" to him. The twelve acknowledged the message and ministry of Paul as sufficient unto itself. Paul's evangel needed no addition—and received none—from the twelve. But, on the contrary, since God was operating in Paul for the apostleship of the nations, as well as in Peter for that of the Circumcision, the twelve perceived that Paul had been entrusted with the evangel of the Uncircumcision, according as Peter of the Circumcision. Hence, James, Cephas, and John "knew" the grace which was being given to Paul. As a result, they gave Paul and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, acknowledging that Paul and Barnabas were to be for the nations, yet they themselves for the Circumcision. The only word they wished to add was a request that Paul and his fellow workers may be remembering the poor among the Jews, which same thing, as Paul assures us, he endeavored also to do.

     Considered in itself, it is possible to understand the phrase "the evangel of the Uncircumcision" as a metonymy for "the evangelization of the Uncircumcision." But it is not translation but interpretation to render this phrase, as in most modern Bibles, "the gospel to the Uncircumcision." Such a rendering supports the popular claim that in all respects Paul's gospel is the same as that of the twelve. It gives credence as well to the related common assertion

p183
God Operates in the Apostles

that by the words "the gospel of Christ," we are to understand a singular message of good news which, in all particulars, applies to all who are in Christ.

     Both "Uncircumcision" and "Circumcision" are in the genitive case. As will be explained later in this article, the sign of the genitive in English is OF- not TO-. Ideally, objective translation requires the former and precludes the latter. There may be a few cases where, due to the idiosyncracies of English, good diction may be strained if the genitive should be represented by OF. Nearly always, however, and certainly in this case at hand, it makes perfectly good English to say "the evangel of the Uncircumcision," as much so as to say, "the epistles of the apostle Paul." They are not the epistles to the apostle Paul, but the apostle Paul's epistles. Similarly, Paul does not speak of the evangel to the Uncircumcision, but of the Uncircumcision's evangel.

     No one claims that the phrase "the apostleship of the Circumcision" (2:8), ought to be translated "the apostleship to the Circumcision." Further, it should be noted that by the words which follow in verse 9, "we, indeed, are to be for [lit., "into"] the nations, yet they for [i.e., "into"] the Circumcision," any general thought of evangelization directed, respectively, to both the nations and the Circumcision is thereby adequately expressed. Hence it becomes all the more untenable to render verse 7 as "the evangel to the Uncircumcision."

     We are plainly told that the One Who operates in Peter for the apostleship of the Circumcision, is the One Who operates in Paul also for (the apostleship of) the nations. And, the word to us also is, that Paul has been entrusted with the evangel of the Uncircumcision, according as Peter (with the evangel) of the Circumcision. Let us accept the Scripture for what it says, while adjusting our faith accordingly.

     Paul speaks explicitly of "the evangel which I am heralding among the nations" (2:2); "the evangel which is being

p184
The Apostle of the Nations

brought by me" (1:11); which he neither accepted from man nor was taught by man, that instead came to him "through a revelation of Jesus Christ" (1:12). The apostle himself will inform us as to its particulars. If we believe and understand both the revelations of Paul's evangel, according to Christ Himself, as well as the teachings of the twelve according as the Lord instructed them, we will soon know whether Paul's evangel "of the Uncircumcision" is a fresh revelation, distinct in various respects from the teaching of the twelve, or is, however expressed, essentially merely a restatement of their teaching.

     It is not that the evangel of the Uncircumcision is the exclusive province of those of the nations; nor is it that the evangel of the Circumcision debars all but those who are Israelites by nature. It is rather that the evangel of the Uncircumcision is the evangel which is primarily for those of the nations, as brought to the nations through the ministry of the apostle Paul, who is the apostle of the nations (Rom.11:13; cp 1 Tim.2:7; 2 Tim.1:11; Eph.3:8).

     Certain Israelites (such as Paul himself) are also called and blessed according to that evangel which, characteristically, is the evangel of the Uncircumcision. Similarly, certain non-Israelites were themselves called and blessed according to that evangel which, characteristically, is the evangel of the Circumcision.

     In the former case, any such descendants of Jacob lose their standing as Israelites and forfeit the advantages of the law—while concomitantly gaining the even greater benefits of the evangel of the Uncircumcision. If they are faithful, like Paul, they gladly forfeit all such benefits of flesh, while deeming them mere refuse (cf Phil.3:4-8).

     In the latter case, like those of old who sojourned in Israel, any such non-Israelite believers who were nonetheless called and blessed according to the evangel of the Circumcision, were required to heed the law of Yahweh, which

p185
"Out of Faith" and "Through Faith"

attended that evangel. Any such ones must become proselytes (cf Acts 2:10; 6:5; 13:43); that is, they must "come toward" Israel and observe the "one law," which applied not only to the native-born, but to the naturalized citizen as well (Ex.12:49). Initially, such ones had to undergo the rite of circumcision; subsequently, they would make a passover to Yahweh. They would then be deemed "natives of the land [of Israel]" (Ex.12:48,49). As naturalized Israelites, they would also be required to keep from violating the sabbaths, as well as to keep their hand from any evil, according to the law of Moses. Only thus could they hold fast to Yahweh's covenant (Isa.56:1-7; cp Acts 15:21) and be worthy of the resurrection of the just (cf Luke 14:14; 20:35; cp Matt.5:17-20; 7:21-23).

     Thus it is fitting for Paul to declare that God will be justifying the Circumcision "out of faith" and the Uncircumcision "through the faith" (Rom.3:30). In each case, the faith which justifies is "Jesus Christ's faith" (Rom.3:22); "the faith of Jesus" (Rom.3:26). As in Romans 11:36, where it is revealed that all is not only out of God, but through God as well, here too in Romans 3:30, it is certainly likewise true that, under God, both the Circumcision and the Uncircumcision owe not only the origin but the agency of their justification as well to the faith of Christ.

     Yet in the case of the Circumcision believers, who must center much of their attention upon their own observance of the law, it is not so obvious that, even so, their justification is solely out of Jesus Christ's faith. After all, this truth, as such, is not even a part of the evangel of the Circumcision, even though it is certainly true concerning them, even as Paul declares.

     However, in the case of the believers of the Uncircumcision, who are not under law at all (Rom.6:14), for whom Grace reigns even where sin increases (Rom.5:20,21), whose very evangel brings to the forefront the fact that

p186
Incorrect in their Attitude to the Truth of the Evangel

their justification is not only out of (the faith of) Christ, but is through (the faith of) Christ as well, it becomes fitting for Paul to emphasize that God will be justifying them "through the faith [of Christ]."


FEAR AND HYPOCRISY

     Now when Cephas came to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, for he was self-censured. For, before the coming of some from James, he ate together with those of the nations. Yet when they came, he shrank back, and severed himself, fearing those of the Circumcision. And the rest of the Jews also play the hypocrite with him, so that Barnabas also was led away with their hypocrisy (2:11-13).

     Cephas was "self-censured" concerning his hypocrisy; he knew he was wrong and experienced guilt. Before the coming of "some from James," he had eaten together with those of the nations. "Yet when they came, he shrank back, and severed himself, fearing those of the Circumcision." Then the rest of the Jews joined in, and they too played the hypocrite, together with him. They were all aware that even though the believers of the Uncircumcision did not observe the law, this was no reason to decline their fellowship, much less to sever themselves from them. It was those who came "from James" who were in the wrong, not Paul or the believers of the Uncircumcision. In supposing that those of the Uncircumcision must be circumcised and keep the law if they would be saved (cf Acts 15:1,2,5), or at this juncture, at least in imposing their own opinions as to practical holiness and perfection upon others, these unnamed men behaved most improperly. Yet to have such a profound influence not only upon Cephas but upon the rest of the Jews and even Barnabas besides, they must have been highly esteemed men of renown. Yet even so, they were in fact but self-appointed authoritarians engaging in shameful (albeit highly effective) fear tactics.

(continued in next post due to character limit)

[Tom]

p187
Incorrect in their Attitude to the Truth of the Evangel

     But when I perceived that they are not correct in their attitude toward the truth of the evangel, I said to Cephas in front of all, "If you, being inherently a Jew, are living as the nations, and not as the Jews, how are you compelling the nations to be judaizing" (2:14)?

     It was not that they were wholly ignorant of the evangel heralded by Paul, but that they were incorrect in their attitude concerning it. They failed to give it sufficient honor and recognition. Thus under the duress of circumstance, their remarkable fear of these Circumcision authoritarians, became the decisive influence in determining their behavior.

     Cephas was "inherently" (i.e., originally, by right) a Jew; it was not that he had become a naturalized citizen, but that he was a Jew "by nature" (cp 2:15). Even so, in acknowledgement of Paul's evangel, Cephas properly had been living "as [those of the] nations" live, and "not as Jews," who commonly had little or no association with non-Jews. This is simply to say that in respect of free intercourse with those of the nations, Cephas, hitherto, had behaved as if he himself were one of the nations. Yet when some formidable ones from James came, due to his fear of these men of the Circumcision, he shrank back and even went so far as to sever himself from those of the nations.

     How is it, then, Paul asks, that you, Cephas, are compelling the nations to be judaizing? It was by no means Peter's teaching, in word, that judaizing was compulsory for those of the nations; in fact, earlier, he had spoken against any such claim (cf Acts 15:7-11). Even though Cephas did not verbally affirm that it was compulsory for the nations to be judaizing, nevertheless, by his actions, he effectually did this very thing. That is, in light of Cephas' own behavior, the non-Jewish believers might well conclude that the only way for them to be accepted as faithful at least by their Jewish fellow believers if not by God Himself as well, would be by their taking up with Judaism. How inconsis-

p188
The Genitive Case is the Specifying Case

tent it was of Cephas to behave as he did, in light of the strong, negative influence that this would bring to bear upon the believers of the nations.


THROUGH FAITH OF CHRIST,
OR FAITH IN CHRIST?

     In the next article in this series, we intend to consider Galatians 2:16, which is centered in the revelation that "we may be justified through the faith of Christ and not by works of law." But in preparation for that study, we first need to consider the translation itself, "faith of Christ." This becomes a special need since most modern translations, even as they render "the evangel of the Uncircumcision" (2:7) as "the gospel to the uncircumcised" (e.g., the NASB), translate "faith of Christ" similarly, as "faith in Christ."

     This question as to the sense of the phrase, "the faith x Christ," is by no means solely a question of grammar; yet it is indeed a question in which grammatical issues are an important consideration. Grammatically, the question as to what is to be understood by pistis Iesou Christou (i.e., "faith x Jesus Christ"), is a question of the usage of the genitive case. Grammatical case is the syntactical relationship of a noun, pronoun, or adjective to other words in a sentence, generally indicated by declensional endings in inflected languages (such as Greek), or by prepositions and word order in non-inflected languages (such as English).

     The Greek genitive case includes the English possessive case. The genitive's presence is indicated in the CONCORDANT GREEK TEXT'S sublinear by OF- (when no connective is present; e.g., "son of David," Matt.1:20). OF is intended as a neutral means by which to indicate the genitive (that is, to indicate that, in some respect, "this is of that").

     Though the Concordant Version sometimes renders the genitive as an adjective (e.g., "His messengers OF-POWER" as "His powerful messengers," 2 Thess.1:7), otherwise,

p189
The Genitive Case is the Specifying Case

the CV nearly always represents the genitive case by the English "of." (1)

     The genitive case is the case of genus or kind. It is the specifying case; the case of appurtenance. The function of the genitive is largely adjectival (e.g., "the day of preparation," was the preparation day; Luke 23:54). (2) Indeed, the Concordant Version renders "[after] the exile OF-BABYLON," as "[after] the Babylonian exile" (Matt.1:12). Similarly, "the blasphemy of the spirit" (Matt.12:31), in the Greek syntax, is "THE...OF THE spirit blasphemy."

     The usual claim, however, is that the genitive "OF-Christ faith" is nonetheless translated true to sense as "faith in Christ," since, we are told, this phrase is an "objective genitive." It is said that as the phrase "faith of God" in Mark 11:22) (3) concerns man's faith God-ward, the Pauline phrase "faith of Christ" concerns man's faith Christ-ward.

     The answer to this, of course, is that it does not follow that if, in the nature of the case, "faith of God" in the preceding text involves man's faith God-ward, "faith of Christ,"



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. An exception is the genitive "faith OF-TRUTH" in 2 Thessalonians 2:13, which the 1976 edition renders "faith in the truth." Perhaps the idiom is along the lines of the thought that the Thessalonians' faith partook of the nature of truth. Thus it was "of-truth faith." Truth indeed fosters confidence in itself. Like ourselves, the Thessalonians found faith growing in them as they received truth; hence, "faith OF-TRUTH."

2. cp A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament, In the Light of Historical Research, p.493; Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman Press, 1934.

3. "And answering, Jesus is saying to them, `if you have faith of God, verily, I am saying to you that whosoever may be saying to this mountain, `Be picked up and cast into the sea,' and may not be doubting in his heart, but should be believing that what he is speaking is occurring, it shall be his, whatsoever he may be saying." It should be noted that genuine "OF-GOD faith" (as opposed to mere fleshly credulity in its name), necessarily incorporates the ablative sense of faith which is from God, according as He has spoken. Only then, in turn, does it become faith that is also God-ward.


p190
The Grace of Christ is the Faith of Christ

as Paul uses this expression, refers to man's faith Christward. By such faulty logic as this, nearly anything can be "proved." Yet beyond such fallacious arguments, there is little to commend the claim that "faith of Christ" means man's faith in Christ.

     In fact, the main reason for the acceptance of this interpretation (which is made a part of the translation itself in most modern Bibles) is the age-old tradition that affirms that one is saved by his own believing. Such a notion is then read into the text. In turn, it is further claimed that through such very passages, Paul himself sets forth the self-same teaching. Thus, through such circular reasoning, the rendering "faith in Christ" is justified by its advocates.

     All that the Greek says is: OF-Christ faith; that is, faith that, in some respect, has reference, or relates to Christ. The translation "faith in Christ," then, is not really a translation at all, but an interpretation. And, as popularly understood, it is certainly a mistaken interpretation as well.

     Even on grammatical grounds the case here for an "objective" genitive (i.e., for a faith that is directed Christward) is very weak. Yet if one insists on such an interpretation, it would then become necessary to refer this "faith in Christ" to God, not to man, in order for this expression to accord with the evangel itself, the revelation that justification is gratuitous and in grace, through the deliverance which is in Christ Jesus.

     In the Pauline epistles, apart from the disputed cases in which the genitive is "Christ" or its equivalent, in every case (approximately twenty-four instances) in which "faith" is followed by a proper noun or pronoun in the genitive case, the genitive is unmistakably subjective. Twenty instances refer to the faith of believers; one to the faith of anyone who believes; two to the faith of Abraham; and one to the faithfulness of God.

     When Paul wishes to speak of the believer's faith in (i.e.,

p191
The Grace of Christ is the Faith of Christ

"into") Christ, he does so not by means of a genitive noun apart from a preposition, but by means of an accusative (i.e., objective) noun together with an accusative preposition: "...rejoicing and observing your order and the stability of your faith in (i.e., "into") Christ" (Col.2:5).

     A parallel expression to the faith of Christ, is that of the grace of Christ: "grace which is of the One Man, Jesus Christ" (Rom.5:15). It would never occur to anyone to translate this text as "grace in Christ," much less to claim that it speaks of the believer's grace! Yet the only real difference between the genitive "of Christ" here and those which we have considered elsewhere, is that here the phrase is appended as a modifier of grace, while in the others (as in Galatians 2:20) the same phrase functions as a modifier of faith.

     Similarly, just as Romans 3:3 speaks of "the faith(fulness) of God," Romans 3:22,26 speaks of the "faith(fulness) of Jesus Christ," the "faith(fulness) of Jesus." Further, the phrase "the faith of Abraham" in Romans 4:16 forms a precise formal parallel to the phrase "the faith of Jesus" in Romans 3:26. Thus, as these parallels between the faith of Abraham and the faith of Christ make clear, "the faith of Christ" refers to His faithful obedience unto death; our Lord's trust in God concerning the cross.

     The very notion that those texts which say "faith of Christ" nonetheless have in view faith in Christ—namely the believer's own faith in Christ—is but the stepchild of the long-standing tradition that affirms that "justification by faith" means man's justification not by his performing works of law, but by his acceptance of Christ and assenting to faith in Him. The idea is that man saves himself, or if it is preferred, qualifies for God to save him, not by a former method, that of performing righteous deeds, but by a new method, that of acquiescing in faith.

     Traditional theology is not merely saying that salvation comes upon believing in Christ, and not apart from or

p192
The Essence of the Evangel

prior to. What it is also saying (even if more implicitly than explicitly) is that salvation is of the nature of an exchange, a reward, requital, or compensation. When preachers say that salvation is "by faith [i.e., man's faith]," they are using "by" in a transactional sense, according to the meeting of a requirement (as in, "by doing your work, you are entitled to your wages").

     The phrase faith OF-Christ, however, is parallel to and must agree with the essence of the evangel itself, the revelation that we are "being justified gratuitously in [God's] grace, through the deliverance which is in Christ Jesus" (Rom.3:24). The deliverance is not said to be through our faith in Christ Jesus, but through Christ Jesus Himself. Similarly, it is not revealed that we were conciliated to God through our faith in the death of His Son, but that we were conciliated to God through the death of His Son (Rom.5:10). Further, it will not do to attempt to avoid this truth by artfully claiming that while this is so, it is only so on the "condition" (i.e., based upon a requirement) that we accept and believe on Christ. Any such claim is spurious; for we are not justified on a "conditional" basis that we meet some sort of requirement. Instead, we are justified apart from law, on a gratuitous and gracious basis, which precludes any and all requirements.

     Therefore, all passages which declaim "the faith of Jesus Christ," out of which we are justified, must be understood to be referring to a faith which is His own: Christ's own perfect faith—not man's faulty faith in Him.

     Of course we ourselves can only speak of our justification by means of our own faith, since it is by faith that we apprehend what God has achieved through the work of the cross, even as what He will yet achieve in the eons ahead, when His promises are fulfilled. Still, the saint's own faith only gains for him a recognition of the justification which God has already established for him—through the faith of Christ (cf Rom.4:25-5:1; 5:9).
J.R.C.

[eaglesway]

What had taken place was that Peter had allowed himself to be swayed from the truth of the freedom ond oneness in the new ecclesia of God by a faction of legalists.

Notice, his attitude was wrong to THE EVANGEL.

There have always been factionalist among the ecclesia, Paul described them as brothers who were eak in the faith, and he appealed to the free, mature believers to make allowances for their weakness, but he also exhorted the believers not to be taken capitve by that weakness of faith.


Peter was supposed to be establishing THE EVANGEL among the Jews as Paul was establishing THE EVANGEL among the Gentiles-

But Paul, being like a hammer for God, perceived that Peter had been moved of the foundation and corrected him about it.

Peter repented and returned to THE EVANGEL.

[Tom]

http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V87P2 p226

STUDIES IN GALATIANS


"THROUGH THE FAITH OF CHRIST"
(Galatians 2:15-21)

     We, who by nature are Jews, and not sinners of the nations, having perceived that a man is not being justified by works of law, except alone through the faith of Christ Jesus, we also believe in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by the faith of Christ and not by works of law, seeing that by works of law shall no flesh at all be justified (2:15,16).

     As Paul herein explains to the Galatians, those who are truly enlightened believers in Christ—even if "by nature" they are Jews (and so inherently zealous for the law; cp Acts 21:20)—recognize that a man is not being justified by works of law, but through the faith of Christ Jesus.

     Those who know the truth, even if they, like Paul, should be Jews from birth, and from their youth fully mindful of all that the law has to say as to the central place of seeking justification by works (cp Rom.2:13; 10:3), realize that, nonetheless, a man is not being justified by works of law—no matter how zealous he may be in his quest for attaining such a goal.

     Yet as those who have been enlightened to perceive the evangel, Paul explains that "we" not only become aware of how justification does not occur, but of how it does occur as well. We perceive, says Paul, that it is through the deliverance which is in Christ Jesus (Rom.3:24), which is to say that it is through the faith of Christ Jesus.

     Such ones, then, may "also" believe "into Christ Jesus"—thus to restate the case more positively and boldly—that (1)

p227
All have Need of a Saviour

they may be justified by the faith of Christ; and (2) not by works of law, seeing that, according as it is written, "no living one at all can be righteous before [God]" (cit. Psa.143:2; cp Rom.3:20).

     Of course, this declaration that no living one at all can be righteous before God, is a relative statement, made in relation to law. That is, no living one at all can be righteous before God by works of law. But, by the faith of Christ, we may be justified! This is the evangel; and this, Paul would have us know.

     That justification is by the faith of Christ, is the answer to the age-old question, "...how can a mortal be righteous before El" (Job 9:2)? It is one thing to be righteous before men, but quite another to be righteous before God. It is one thing to be classed as "just," comparatively speaking, in contrast to those who are abjectly defiled; but it is quite another to be just before God, and thus to be declared righteous by God Himself.

     In this respect, the words of Job's friend, Eliphaz the Temanite, are true enough: "What is a mortal that he should be cleared, or that one born of a woman should be justified? If even on His holy ones, He puts no reliance, and the heavens are not purged in His eyes, how much less man, who is abhorrent and spoiled, who is drinking iniquity like water" (Job 15:14-16).

     Noble men often have sought righteousness before God on a basis of their own deeds; and, since compared to their fellows, at least they have approached more closely to the ideal, it is the custom among men to term such ones "righteous." But even such exceptional personages have fallen far short of the ideal. They too must be included among the "all" who not only have sinned but who have also been found wanting of the glory of God (Rom.3:23), which alone is the standard of true righteousness.

     Though God has indeed graced such commendable ones

p228
Variations in Translation

with an uncommon measure of virtue, still, it is a virtue that is neither comprehensive nor constant. Even the noble, then, are themselves extensively corrupted; and, even as the rest, hopelessly lost apart from a Saviour. They too, on a basis of "works of law," can never be just "before God."


"NOT BY WORKS OF LAW"

     The 1976 edition of the Concordant Version, in Galatians 2:16, renders the phrase which in the paragraph above I present as "but (through the faith of Christ Jesus)," as "except alone (through the faith of Christ Jesus)" (2:16). This was an attempt to clarify the 1930 edition of the CV which read, "except it be through..." even as the 1966 CV which was translated, "if it should not be through...."

     The problem here is that if the phrase in question, which follows the words "a man is not being justified by works of law," is taken as an exception under the circumstance of which a man is being justified by works of law, the truth is lost and the context itself is contradicted.

     An attempt was made to circumvent this by the addition of the lightface "alone." Yet the undiscerning reader, upon noting that "alone" was added by the translator, may declare that he is not obliged to accept any such "additions." Such a one may then conclude—albeit contrary to the entire tenor of the passage—that Paul's thought is that while ordinarily a man is not being justified by works of law, when these, however, are coupled with faith in Christ, a man is being justified by works of law!

     Since the Greek is IF-EVER NO ean mee, our translators endeavored to reflect this fact in the English, while still providing a readable translation. Yet their renderings remained obscure, at least to the ordinary reader. We have noted that "but" (as in, "but for the grace of God, there go I") can serve well for this Greek phrase; in fact the Authorized Version renders ei mee (IF-NO) thus 53 times, includ-

p229
God is our Justifier

ing in this passage. We now propose to do the same, with a superior prefix "ex" (for "except") preceding in small type. Thus, in a future edition, the verse would simply read: "a man is not being justified by works of law but through the faith of Christ Jesus."

     Though because of the idiosyncrasies of idiom, the sense of this text may be difficult to convey when rendered more strictly, in principle, the thought here accords with that of 1 Corinthians 12:3, where we read, "No one is able to say, `Lord is Jesus' except by holy spirit." That is, "No one is able to say `Lord is Jesus.' Except by holy spirit, (this cannot be done)." Similarly, then, "A man is not being justified by works of law. Except through the faith of Christ Jesus, (this cannot be done)."


JUSTIFYING THE IRREVERENT

     To be "justified," is to be declared righteous; and, it is God Himself Who is our Justifier (Rom.8:33). Through the benefits afforded to us through the faith of Christ, even now, God declares us righteous.

     We are justified both in a vindicatory sense, as well as in an anticipatory sense. In the vindicatory sense, through the work of Christ, God is able to "justify" us in the sense of "show sufficient reason why" such sinners even as ourselves not only should exist, but should also be saved. It is because it is only through sin, and, the deliverance therefrom, that God's love and grace through the blood of Christ, may be made known. God has need of irreverent sinners, to glorify His own name in their salvation (Rom.4:5).

     In the anticipatory sense, God justifies us through Christ, thus, even now, calling what is not as if it were, because, in that day, the day of Christ's glorious advent, we will then actually be constituted just. Then, we will be conformed to the image of His Son (Rom.8:29). In the day of our vivification, we will enjoy immortality and incorruption, even

p230
Righteousness from God

as great power and glory (1 Cor.15:42,43). We are awaiting a Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, Who will transfigure the body of our humiliation, to conform it to the body of His glory (Phil.3:20,21). Surely, then, in an anticipatory sense as well, it should not surprise that, even today, God already declares us righteous.

     Yet this is only so, "through the faith of Christ Jesus" (Gal.2:16). In Christ, "we have boldness and access, with confidence, through His faith" (Eph.3:12). Accordingly, like Paul, we wish "to be found in Him, not having [our] righteousness, which is of law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is from God for faith" (Phil.3:9).

     Paul intimately associates "the faith of Christ Jesus," with "the deliverance which is in Christ Jesus" (Rom.3:24). He uses both of these phrases in identifying the means through which our justification is effected. It is through Christ's own faith, then, which became His faithfulness, that our justification is achieved. Our Lord's trust in God concerning the cross, which led to His faithful obedience unto death, is the sole instrumentality of our justification.


LIVING UNTO GOD

     Now if, while seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves also were found sinners, is Christ, consequently, a dispenser of sin? May it not be coming to that! For if I am building again these things which I demolish, I am commending myself as a transgressor (2:17,18).

     Though a trivial act in itself, Cephas' refusal to eat with those of the nations (2:12), was fraught with serious consequences. Thus he affirmed that the uncircumcised believers were "common and unclean" (cp Acts 10:28; 11:3), and set up again the barrier of law. If we should put ourselves under law, by claiming that this is what Christ would have us do, we imply that, effectually, He is the dispenser of sin.

p231
The Saving Grace of God

This is because, if He indeed would now have us take up the very agency through which Sin revives, gets an incentive, and produces in us all manner of coveting (cf Rom.7:8-10), it is impossible to disassociate Him from our failures. Such, through works of law, was the nature of the old covenant under which God displayed man's failure in all its horror. Such is not the nature of the Pauline evangel, which is, so to say, "a new covenant" indeed (cp 2 Cor.3:6).

     If Paul were to once again establish a policy of law-righteousness, which he had previously discarded (cp Phil.3:7), in so doing he would be "commending" himself as a transgressor. That is, thus he would be providing himself with the very means by which he would now have the "standing" of a transgressor. Where no law is, there is no transgression (Rom.4:15). Yet under law, sinners become transgressors. Paul refused to put himself in any such jeopardy ever again.

     Submitting to public pressures (as Cephas did, and as the Galatians were doing) in a way that suggests we think the law has some force in justification is a sin and may give the impression that justification in Christ encourages such sinful hypocrisy. Yet the Galatians were making law-justification (Rom.2:13) an acceptable thing, at least in relation to circumcision, and so were rebuilding what they had demolished. Were they actually "under law" (in relation to Paul's evangel), their taking up with the law would have been a transgression! (There is perhaps some irony here).

     Under grace we have a "right" to do anything: "All is allowed me" (1 Cor.8:9; 10:23). But Paul was very jealous of the evangel and was sensitive to the effects our behavior will have on others. The saving grace of God trains us to act in accord with what we believe, that is out of love and with the glory of God always in view.

     This can only be done by the saving power of the evangel itself. This is the message of Galatians 5:25, how it is that "living in spirit, in spirit, we may be observing the ele-

p232
A Compendium of the Faith

ments [of the law] also." The essential meaning of the law (love for God and then for our fellow humans) is observed by those who are "living in spirit" (which means living in accord with the evangel; cf Gal.3:5).

     For I, through law, died to law, that I should be living to God. With Christ have I been crucified, yet I am living; no longer I, but living in me is Christ. Now that which I am now living in flesh, I am living in faith that is of the Son of God, Who loves me, and gives Himself up for me (2:19,20).

     "We have endeavored to transcribe this marvelous compendium of the faith as nearly as possible as it is in the Original, for even the order of the words is exquisite. The sentence opens and closes with Christ, and a negative I occupies its center. It may be shown graphically thus:


          `WITH CHRIST
             HAVE I BEEN CRUCIFIED,
               YET I AM LIVING--
               NO LONGER I,
             BUT LIVING IN ME IS
          CHRIST.'" (1)



FAITH'S LAW OF RIGHTEOUSNESS

     God has ordained a law for us! It is not a law of works; it is instead, "faith's law; for we are reckoning a man to be justified by faith apart from works of law" (Rom.3:28). This law states that: "through Jesus Christ's faith....[we are] being justified gratuitously in [God's] grace, through the deliverance which is in Christ Jesus" (Rom.3:22,24). It is through this law of faith that we have died to all law concerned with sin and death. Christ died for our sins! Our sins have been died for, "that we should be living to God." Our living to God depends upon our having died to



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A. E. Knoch, CONCORDANT COMMENTARY, p.281.


p233
The Power of Christ's Spirit

condemnatory law. Hence, as Paul declares, "With Christ have I been crucified." Yet the wonder of it is that though it is true that in this respect we have "died," it is as a result of this very death, together with Christ, that in our spirits we now are living! So in saying "I" am living, Paul must add that it is "no longer I, but living in me is Christ."

     It was not the power of the flesh, which is weakness, which was vitalizing Paul, but the power of Christ's spirit in him. As he said, "that [life] which I am now living in flesh, I am living in faith that is of the Son of God, Who loves me, and gives Himself up for me" (2:20b).

     I am not repudiating the grace of God.... (2:21a)

     To "repudiate" something is to reject its validity, or to refuse to acknowledge it. It is to have "no place" for it, which is the meaning of the elements of the Greek word we translate "repudiate" (atheteoo, UN-PLACE).

     The apostle Paul, decidedly, was not repudiating the grace of God; he was rather exalting it, and giving it its rightful place.

     ...for if righteousness is through law, consequently Christ died gratuitously (2:21b).

     The Galatians, however, in seeking justification through law instead of through the faith of Christ, were repudiating the grace of God. "For if," as they fondly imagined, "righteousness is through law, consequently Christ died gratuitously" (2:21). A gratuitous act is an uncalled for or unwarranted act, such as that of the hatred of the Jews for Jesus, whereby, in hating Him, since He had done nothing but good, they necessarily hated Him gratuitously (John 15:25).

     The Galatians' repudiation of the grace of God was their main mistake; indeed, it was the essence of their apostasy. Their error did not simply consist, since they were not called to be proselytes of Judaism, in attempting to put themselves under law (Gal.4:21). The believers of the Circumcision, though under law, were in the true grace of

p234
Righteousness through Grace

God (cp 1 Peter 1:10; 5:10,12), which all who were faithful to that calling freely acknowledged. The presence of law need not entail the repudiation of grace. Under the Circumcision evangel, while those who are chosen (i.e., "the elect") must qualify for entrance into the terrestrial kingdom by the performance of lawful deeds (cp Matt.7:21-23), it is to the grace of God alone that they may ascribe the faithfulness of their service (cp Rom.11:5,6; Isa.26:12).

     Let us note well that the Galatians' chief wrong was just one thing: their repudiation of the grace of God. They had been transferred from the evangel of the grace of Christ, to a different "evangel" (Gal.1:6), which, according to truth, was no evangel at all.

     Everywhere in Scripture, especially within the Pauline epistles, "grace" is of the nature of a favor, or gracious gift. It is not granted "out of works," or in return for "services rendered" (cp Rom.4:4; 11:6). It is the very antithesis of a reward or compensation. We cannot qualify ourselves for it, nor disqualify ourselves from it. It not only knows nothing of "requirements," but precludes that very notion.

     Having presented one's understanding of the nature of the evangel, it will hardly suffice merely to use the word "grace," as a summary term thereof, if one's understanding of the nature of the evangel itself, is not of the nature of grace. To do so would be as illegitimate as to describe a thorn and yet call it a rose.

     If righteousness were through law, there would have been "no just cause" for Christ to have died. Then His death would have been both uncalled for and unwarranted. But since His death was not a gratuitous event, it follows that righteousness is not through law and that the Galatians and all their imitators are not correct in seeking it on that basis.

     May it be our privilege and portion, not to be imitators of the "foolish Galatians" (3:1), but of the apostle Paul, the apostle of the nations (Rom.11:13).
J.R.C.

[Seth]

What had taken place was that Peter had allowed himself to be swayed from the truth of the freedom ond oneness in the new ecclesia of God by a faction of legalists.

Notice, his attitude was wrong to THE EVANGEL.

There have always been factionalist among the ecclesia, Paul described them as brothers who were eak in the faith, and he appealed to the free, mature believers to make allowances for their weakness, but he also exhorted the believers not to be taken capitve by that weakness of faith.


Peter was supposed to be establishing THE EVANGEL among the Jews as Paul was establishing THE EVANGEL among the Gentiles-

But Paul, being like a hammer for God, perceived that Peter had been moved of the foundation and corrected him about it.

Peter repented and returned to THE EVANGEL.

Exactly!

[Tom]

http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V37P1 p7


THE CIRCUMCISION EVANGEL
Galatians 2:7.

WHAT is the subject matter of this evangel? Does it differ from the evangel of the UNcircumcision? Why do the differing titles arise? Have the two evangels the same objective? Our discussion will seek to answer these queries.

     Both evangels have the purpose of bringing salvation, yet we must distinguish between two aspects of salvation, for, in relation to each evangel, salvation differs radically. We may understand why it does so when we learn that the underlying purpose of each of the two evangels is also a different one. One evangel saves for the kingdom of the prophets on the earth; the other for the ecclesia which is Christ's body among the celestials. One evangel is but a stage on the way to God's ultimate; the other brings God's ultimate, for its inherent spiritual value is such that it will consummate the eons. With these introductory thoughts we will turn to the detail of the Circumcision evangel, merely mentioning, when necessary, matter related to the evangel of the UNcircumcision.

     Let us note the "of" and "to" of Gal.2:7 and 2:9:


          (1)  OF--the  divergent nature.
          (2)  TO--the  distinct sphere.


     The "of" implies an evangel related to a particular privilege. The "to" indicates an evangel for a particular people.

     These titles arise and take their point because the privilege of circumcision has been cited as of the greatest

p8
The Covenant with David

value. As to privilege, the Circumcision evangel is based upon God's covenant with Abraham (Gen.17:10). Circumcision was the sign of a perpetual covenant. It is for a particular nation, whom God invested with supremacy amongst the nations of the world, and through whom God channels blessings to all the others.

     But Israel had failed to enjoy the promised blessings of circumcision. History had merely unfolded and made Israel's delinquency apparent. Yet God had promised them the inward spiritual reality signified by circumcision (Deut.30:5,6). The evangel of the Circumcision is one more of God's means to bring such blessings to Israel.

     The evangel of the Circumcision is vitally related to the circumcised people who are its chief beneficiaries. This evangel takes account of Israel's privileges and prerogatives, and is founded on the fact that they are to become the channel of blessings to the other nations if they themselves accept its blessings, as intimated by the Hebrew Scriptures.

     Though the Circumcision evangel is addressed to the physical seed of Abraham, through Sarah, yet its special emphasis (i.e., in the so-called gospels and the Acts) was around God's covenant with David (see Acts 2:30). Though the title of this evangel "arises in relation to Peter (Gal.2), yet as a matter of fact it had been initiated by John the Baptist. His ministry was followed by that of the Lord Jesus, and later by that of Peter at Pentecost (Acts 13:24-28). Thus these preachings were "a word of salvation" for the nation.

     With the coming of Pentecost, the priestly feature was added to this evangel, the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus. This had to be dealt with. It was in its first analysis only another crime committed against God's prophets by the Circumcision.

     Though the Twelve proclaim the historic facts concerning the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus

p9
An Evangel for God's People

as witnesses, yet they do not develop doctrine from these facts. The Circumcision evangel does not deal with the deeper and ultimate meaning and value of the death and resurrection, nor of the cross of Christ. It is quite true that it tells of the sufferings and the blood of Christ shed for the pardoning of sin, but it says nothing of such matters as death with Christ and deliverance from law; nor is the "word of the cross" to be found in it. The Circumcision evangel does not mention the snare of the cross. And the reason is plain. They go against the particular position of Israel.

     To help us to understand this evangel, we should realize that it is proclaimed to those who are in touch with God (John 1:11). He came to His own. He came to a people related to God by a covenant and by a form of knowledge and truth in the law (Rom.2:20). Thus, the ministry of the Lord asserted that He came not to demolish the law (Matt.5:17). Nor were others to teach the annulling of law (Matt.5:19). In fact, many of the points of the sermon on the mount were but a development of the spiritual contents of the precepts of the law. It was into minds instructed by the law that our Master launched His evangel. It was not to people left to themselves during many centuries. The Circumcision evangel did not take away the law. From this fact we can understand why many tens of thousands who had believed were inherently zealous of the law (Acts 21:20). The blessedness of keeping the law will be seen in the millennial kingdom. Then God's law shall be written on new hearts, and, consequently, life will be greatly prolonged. Israel's circumcision is a pledge that the law of God will find no antagonism in their redeemed and cleansed flesh.

     Note also that our Lord proclaimed His evangel before His crucifixion, and, at first, without reference to His sufferings. And when He did begin to speak of these, His words were not understood.

p10
Repentance, Baptism, Pardon

     Even in the past, circumcision should not have been merely an external rite, but should have been of the heart (Deut.10:16). Let us look more closely into the features and announcements of this Circumcision evangel. Take Peter as the exponent. He called Israel to repentance, told them to be baptized, and so their sins would be pardoned (Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:30-32). Primarily repentance was a change of mind and attitude to their Messiah. It calls for the production of worthy fruits (Matt.3:8). Baptism was the outward sign of repentance. This was so in John's pre-proclamation ministry, also the Lord's, and then in that of the twelve (Acts 2:38). Pardon is ruggedly expressed by to let off (Acts 2:38). Repentance and pardon call for faith in the declarations which lead to them. Hence we read:


          all that believe ( Acts 2:24),
          those who hear the word believe ( Acts 4:4).


     In all this, that is, in the evangel of the Circumcision, there is nothing to occasion the arguments which arose against the evangel of the UNcircumcision. The Jew had no reason to forsake circumcision or the law, in order to follow Christ and the twelve. But the Jew must break with both circumcision and the law, as Paul did, if he would be justified by faith, which is the initial item of the UNcircumcision evangel.

     The evangel proclaimed by Paul removes the law, but Peter's evangel does not. The features of repentance, pardon and baptism take their point in the fact of law, but justification is apart from law. Saul was not saved by Peter's evangel. Under the terms of Peter's evangel, Saul ought to have been exterminated (Acts 3:23). Saul was not for hearing that Prophet, nor was he at all repentant.

     Deliverance from law was entirely absent from the Circumcision evangel. Later, mere legalists joined issues with Paul on this question, yet their objections

p11
Good Works Must Follow

could not be made against the evangel defined by the term Circumcision. For the nations to adopt law would mean nothing less than separation from Christ (Gal.5:1-6). Why is this? The salvation to which Israel is being called is not the salvation to which the nations are introduced.

     Let us turn back to examine pardon and faith in the evangel of the Circumcision. Pardon means to let off. It does not put its recipients beyond condemnation. It does not preclude falling aside. Nor does it intimate reconciliation, just as law and ritual do not intimate reconciliation. Pardon requires God to pass over the penalties of sins. It requires the continuance of God's forbearance, yet does not begin to display His righteousness, or the fact that God can be and is also a Justifier. Pardon presumes that good works will ensue. See the illustration regarding land which does not bring forth good herbage (Heb.6:7,8). Pardon requires "things which have to do with salvation" (Heb.6:9), and "diligence....until the consummation" (Heb.3:6,14; 6:11; 1 Peter 2:4; 2 Peter 1:5-11). There is great reward for endurance (Heb.10: 35,36; 11:6). Here we see the force of "enduring" as counselled in (Matt.10:22; 24:13). Even those of the nations, who were previously in contact with God's revelation and, under the Circumcision evangel, came into touch with Israel, were expected to be "acting righteously" (Acts 10:35).

     The difference between the faith of those who believe the evangel of the Circumcision and those who believe the evangel of the Uncircumcision lies in the message which each believe. The faculty to believe is the same in each case, but the character of the faith is related to the contents of the word addressed to them.

     Note how a particular faith arises and what its accompaniments are. The faith of the Uncircumcision was sealed by holy spirit; but that of the Circumcision was corroborated by signs, miracles and various powerful

p12
The Epistle to the Hebrews

deeds (Heb.2:4). Indeed, the powers of the impending eon, to which the evangel directed them, were present along with the confirmation of the Lord's message by those who hear Him (Heb.6:5). Their faith was called forth by these factors. Thus, around this faith we find such aspects as, "believe the works" (John 10:38). Again, in response to the question as to how men may work the work of God: "this is the work of God that you may be believing into the One Whom He commissions" (John 6:29). "And, when it is occurring, you shall be believing" (John 14:29).

     Faith, then, varies in its value and stability according to its basic message. It may require works to perfect it (James 2:22), or endurance to prevent shrinking back (Heb.10:38). And so, with the delay in the coming of the kingdom, the position arises as to whether the faith of the saints will continue, and so confirm the reality of the repentance, the baptism and pardon. If the kingdom was to be postponed indefinitely, to what purpose was their change of attitude toward Him Whom Israel had slain and gibbeted? In the epistles of Peter, and in that to the Hebrews, the saints are urged to maintain the faith which had accompanied their repentance and pardon. And so we may turn to these epistles to extract a brief view of them and their relation to the evangel of the Circumcision.

     The Hebrew epistle. Many are the details to which we could turn. Briefly: that which the Lord began, which those who heard Him confirmed, and God corroborated (2:3,4). This ministry to Israel had emphasized that the slain One was their King. But now they are shown that their avowal was related to the Apostle and Chief Priest, Jesus, over the house of God (3:1). They are urged to hold to this avowal (4:14). This Chief Priest, unlike those of the Levitical Priesthood, had sat down in the holiest (10:12). Here is the intimation why He had not returned as announced by Peter. Their avowal

p13
The Epistles of Peter

was a foundation (6:1) for maturity; the maturity is that which comes under the new covenant (10:14).

     The law perfected nothing, yet the law is being transferred, as also the priesthood. They are pointed to the glories of the Melchizedek Priesthood, related to a more perfect tabernacle. Now that they have such a Priest they are introduced to a better covenant and better promises. They have now a Priest according to the power of an indissoluble life. The law is to be imparted to their comprehension and inscribed in their hearts. Like the worthies of old, whose faith was not requited, they were to hold to their avowal.

     Now they have a living way into the holy places and may approach with a true heart, in assurance of faith, and hearts sprinkled from a wicked conscience. Jesus, by His own blood, has hallowed them. And, like the sin offering burned without the camp, so He suffered outside the gate of Jerusalem. They are to carry His reproach. He, though He sat down, will yet appear the second time, apart from sin, for salvation through faith.

     Peter's epistles: The standpoint is that of one who heard the Lord when on earth. It is addressed to expatriates dispersed by the persecution in Acts (8 and 10). It seeks to encourage their faith amidst further persecution. They are reminded that they are chosen to obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus (1:2, Heb.12:24). These matters speak to them of the covenant and the mercy seat (Ex.24:8; Lev.16:14). They are regenerated to a living expectation (1:3), of incorruptible seed (1:23). The allotment in the land may have faded, but they have a living expectation of an incorruptible and unfading allotment (1:4). This expectation will become a salvation to be revealed in the last era (1:5). Though sorrowed by present trials, yet glory and honor awaits them at the unveiling of Jesus Christ (1:7). Endurance gives grace with God

p14
The Circumcision Fulfill the Prophets

salvation is related to the seeking and searching of the prophets, who told of the sufferings of Christ and the glory to follow (1:10-12; Matt.13:10). The sufferings they were enduring were the outcome of the sufferings Christ endured, for they were Christians.

     Peter reminds them that they are living stones of the spiritual house. They were a holy priesthood (2:5). The Stone, a corner capstone, has been rejected by Israel's builders (2:7), yet these believers are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a procured people (2:9). In making known the power and presence of the Lord Jesus, Peter had not followed wisely made myths (2 Pet.1:16), but had declared that of which they were spectators (1:16). And this is further confirmed by the prophetic word, which is a lamp appearing in a dingy place. They were to confirm their calling and choice; under no circumstances to trip—as had the nation of Israel (Rom.11). A rich entrance will be supplied into the eonian kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:10,11).

     These considerations, though largely confined to one side of the matter, stress that one immediate objective of the evangel of the Circumcision is to lead forward to the glory of the Hebrew prophets. Later Israel will come to the cross of Christ, but that is in the New Creation. Then there will be no Circumcision nor Uncircumcision
E. H. C.

[Seth]

Tom, are you going to post the entire concordant website on this thread?

[Tom]

I wasn't planning on it. Do you think I should?

[Tom]

http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V37P1p15

THE GLORIOUS GOSPEL OF GOD'S GRACE


THE WALK OF ABRAHAM

WALK is the keynote of the salvation of the Circumcision (Gen.17:2). This is in crass contrast to the salvation of the Uncircumcision, which had been revealed to Abram at first (Gen.15:6). There it was FAITH. But Abram had failed to believe as fully as he should have done. He still had confidence in the flesh. This must be destroyed. Therefore it is that Jehovah said to him, "Walk before Me, and become flawless}. To me this now seems an impossible, a dreadful load. But to Abraham and to most of the saints, it is just such a task as they like, and for which they feel quite competent. The whole evangel of the Circumcision is based upon their fearful ignorance of themselves and their overweening confidence in their ability to please God to perfection. Even in my spiritual infancy I could not see why God should demand perfection of Abram. No one could fulfill that! Certainly Abraham did not! Why, then, demand the impossible? I did not see then that God did not intend that Abraham should succeed. He intended that he should fail, and thus lose the confidence he still had in his flesh, and place it in the Deity.

     This is the essential distinction between the two evangels. God wants us to trust Him unreservedly and implicitly. He does not want us to trust in ourselves. He does not expect perfection in the keeping of a covenant, or a law, for that would lead to the very reverse of His intention. Only their failure will teach them their utter lack and His all-sufficiency. Of course He could not reveal this intention of His to them, or the demonstra-

16
Abram was Saved by Faith

tion would have been fruitless. This not only explains the failures of Abraham and the patriarchs, but the threefold apostasy of the nation, as seen in the Hebrew Scriptures (Isa.6), in the "gospels," and in the book of Acts. They walked before Him very imperfectly indeed! Yet, in so doing, they have manifested to the world that the creature is impotent and sinful and offensive apart from the Creator. Man needs God, not only to create him, but to save him and to keep him. When this has been learned by bitter experience, men will be ready to recognize God as their All, and thus attain the goal of the eons.

     The friend of God had a taste of both of these salvations, for he was justified by faith (Gen.15:5; Rom.4; Gal.3) and also by works (Gen.17:1; James 2:21-24). One was before he was circumcised, and apart from it. The other was sealed by circumcision. In the first, Abram did nothing but believe God, and righteousness was reckoned to him unconditionally, apart from works. In the second he is exhorted to walk before God, and be flawless, so that there should be a covenant between him and God, to make him a father of many nations. Let us not confuse the latter phrase with his faith fatherhood of many believers among the nations. Here he is not the father of the nations as such, but only of a few individuals who have faith chosen out of the nations.


ABRAM AND ABRAHAM

     The name Abram (Abrm) comes from the Hebrew stems, ab (FATHER) and rm (HIGH). Abraham (with the h) is just the same except that an e is inserted Abrem. This implies the addition of another stem, making Ab (FATHER), r(m) (HIGH), and em (CLAMOR or throng). One of the m's is dropped in combining. Others derive it from Ab (FATHER), rb (GREAT), and em (throng). The difference is not much or vital, for (GREAT) and (HIGH), are both used as a faded figure merely to magnify the idea. Abram is the personal name, while Abraham unites

p17
Abraham is Concerned with Walk

him with descendants by including the stem THRONG. This corresponds to the two salvations. One is individual, the other national. Contrary to the usual idea, we are associated with Abram, not Abraham. The earlier part of his life, before his circumcision, is associated with the nations. The later enlargement was given in order to connect him with his physical seed.

     I well remember listening with rapt attention to a brother who sought to show the difference between Abram and Abraham. His thought was that the letter h was inserted in Abrm in order to indicate the addition of the holy spirit! Of course this would not be known to Abraham himself, or Paul, because neither the Hebrew nor the Greek has a letter h. The Greek simply doubles the a, Abraam. The Hebrew inserts an e, which is commonly mistaken for an h. As we have seen, it adds the element THRONG to the name. Besides, the name Abram is connected with faith and righteousness. It is the spiritual name, rather than Abraham, which is not used until walk, with physical and national blessing, is in view. In Uncircumcision it is Abram. Since this distinction is not observed in the Greek Scriptures, it is very difficult to carry it out, so we use Abraham, as a rule, to denote the man, apart from these distinctions. But in these studies we will try to keep the names separate.


THE ORIGIN OF CIRCUMCISION

     It is in this light that we must view the rite of circumcision. It is the sign of the covenant which characterizes the salvation of the Circumcision. After promising the land to Abraham and his seed, God goes on to confirm it by the covenant of circumcision (Gen.17:9-14).

     The significance of this sign is almost totally overlooked. In it God gives a foreview of the result of the demonstration He is giving. It signifies the futility of the flesh. As this small sample of the flesh is snipped off, so would God have us deal with the flesh in its

p18
Faith Leads to Righteousness

entirety. This sign ought to have opened their eyes to the failure of the flesh, which has been fully demonstrated since Abraham's day by no other group of the race as thoroughly as by the Circumcision. Let us note in passing that it is not intended for all mankind, but only the throng of nations who have descended from Abraham.


THE FAILURE OF FAITH

     Just as Abram's experience from his call to his justification by faith is the key to the evangel of the uncircumcision and righteousness by faith; so his further experience up to the time he received the rite of circumcision prepares us to understand the evangel of the Circumcision and righteousness by works. It is based on the failure of the faith and the activity of the flesh. Instead of waiting for Isaac, the promised son by the freewoman Sarai, he generates Ishmael by Hagar, the slave. This brings bondage, in which we find walk, and a covenant, and the sign of circumcision without in place of faith within (Gen.16,17).

     The actual acts of Abram which preceded his justification by faith were all righteous when reviewed in the light of God's rights and purpose. His faith in God's declarations had kept him from all wrong. But his, walk which led up to his circumcision was wrong, because it was not founded on faith, but on the flesh. And, indeed, circumcision is a sign of this, for why should the flesh be cut off if it is righteous? Sarai acknowledges that she has done wrong, (Gen.16:5), and that this wrong comes upon Abram. He was wrong in that he hearkened to her advice. The wrong of it is much clearer when we consider how much evil it brought upon Abraham and his descendants. It brought immediate suffering on Sarai and Hagar.


THE REAL CIRCUMCISION

     We are the real, the genuine Circumcision, because we offer divine service to God in spirit, and glory in Christ

p19
The Flesh Foredooms to Failure

Jesus and have no confidence in flesh. The so-called Circumcision are only a Maimcision, for they merely mutilate the flesh, and lack the faith of which circumcision is simply the sign (Phil.3:2-5). They worship God in flesh, and glory in their flesh in direct contradiction to the import of this sign, which consists in the removal, the cutting away of a part of the flesh as a token of the stripping off of the whole. Let us be clear concerning this. We are not the literal Circumcision. We are the figurative Circumcision, the literal Uncircumcision. The fact is that literal circumcision is itself only a sign, an indication, a token, an earnest, a label, in which a small part of the flesh is literally removed to signalize its utter failure and bankruptcy in its entirety. We realize and enjoy that which it merely indicates. We are the real, the genuine Circumcision, even though our flesh is not mutilated as theirs is.

     This is the actual, ultimate truth as to circumcision, and should form the basis of our study. We must remember, however, that all revelation previous to this is not written from this standpoint, but in an enigma, and is seen distorted, as in a mirror. Yet even in that earlier unfolding we will find hints and intimations which would have led a spiritually minded saint into the truth. This is clearly suggested before it was given to Abraham, for he was ninety-nine years old and his flesh was dead, so far as fulfilling the promise of God as to the seed was concerned. Abraham knew this, and said as much to God. He wanted to substitute other flesh, as his heir, but God wished to show that all was dependent on Him, and not on flesh at all. So He vivified, invigorated Abraham, gave him life after death, and then insisted on a sign of this, to keep it in continual remembrance, by cutting off a part of the flesh.

     If a descendant of Abraham were spiritually minded, he would have deduced thus: I am supposed to be the literal seed of Abraham, but, in reality, I am not, for

p20
God's Reckoning is Immanent

Abram had no issue, except Ishmael, until he was physically incapable of propagation. At ninety-nine years he could not have further descendants, and he knew it and acknowledged it. His flesh was beyond hope. I am really a descendant of his faith and of God's vivifying power. This is what my circumcision signifies. Otherwise I would be an Ishmaelite, a product of Abram's unbelieving flesh and a slave girl, doomed to servitude and humiliation...But, alas, few in Israel were humble enough to feel the futility of the flesh.

     All that we have that is of any value is in Christ, not in ourselves. Our circumcision also is in Him. Was His circumcision on the eighth day reckoned to us? By no means. That was made by hands, and consisted in cutting off a very small portion of the flesh. His real circumcision came at the cross, when He was cut off from the land of the living, and His flesh as a whole was stripped off and laid in the tomb. In Him, at that time, we stripped off the body of flesh (Col.2:11). This brings us into the place denoted by circumcision. We possess the spiritual reality of which the physical rite was merely the symbol. Having the thing itself we do not need the label. The label on an empty bottle is of no value. The contents are just as valuable without the label as with it, especially when its qualities are evident by their virtue and potency.


THE SIGN AND SEAL

     It is of great help to impress upon our hearts, that circumcision is a sign and a seal (Rom.4:9-12). Then we will look beyond for that which it signifies and that which it secures. When we come to consider the case of Abraham, let us note that he had God's righteousness, by faith, long before he was circumcised, the rite did not add to either his faith or his own righteousness. It merely labeled him as one who possessed these things. Abram was secretly reckoned righteous in uncircumcision; but he was openly recognized as righteous by the

p21
Man's Recognition is Superficial

sign and seal of circumcision. The reckoning was by God and was immanent. The recognition was for men and was superficial.

     Our Lord acknowledged that the Jews were Abraham's seed in a physical sense, so also were the Ishmaelites and Esau's descendants. But they claimed Abraham as their father in a much deeper sense than that. He would not acknowledge that they were Abraham's children. That was presumption on their part. God, said He, could rouse such children out of the very stones, which they resembled, for they were hard hearted and lifeless clods of earth (Matt.3:9; Luke 3:8). They were so unlike Abraham in their conduct that they had no right to claim him as their ancestor. They were seeking to kill their own Messiah. Imagine Abram doing this! By their works they proved themselves to be descendants of the Adversary, not of Abram. So our Lord said to them, "If you are children of Abraham, did you ever do the works of Abraham" (John 8:31-47)? They had the circumcision on the eighth day, but they not only lacked the faith of which it was the sign and seal, but also the works which perfected it (James 2:22). Abraham offered Isaac by faith; they crucified Christ by unbelief.

     I often think of this in connection with a story told by Dr. Weizmann, the Zionist leader, at a Jewish rally that I attended in Los Angeles. It concerned a Russian Jew who sought to escape from that country, who had a false passport. His name was Abraham, but his passport was in some other name, which was thoroughly drilled into him, as he could not read. But when he came to the border he was too excited to remember anything. They asked him his name, and he answered in great agitation: "I don't know! I forget! But I do know that it is not Abraham!" How true that was of all the Jews even Dr. Weizmann did not know. Whatever their name may be, they are not the children of the friend of God, who trusted Him, and not their own

p22
Abram is Father of those Who Have Faith Abraham, of those who Walk in Faith

arm. The Jews present (I was the only Gentile, so far as I know) were like that poor fellow. They collected money to buy Palestine, the land that was given to Abram and his seed! They were not even Jacob. He would not pay out good money to buy his own land!

     As a result, Abraham became the father of two distinct classes, one of which the apostle associates with the reckoning of faith righteousness in uncircumcision (to which the saints of the nations today belong) and the father of the Circumcision, but not those who merely have the outward sign and seal, but to those who observe the fundamentals of the faith in the footprints of Abram before he was circumcised. This distinction is vital, if we wish to understand the difference between the evangel of the Circumcision and that of the Uncircumcision. As the apostle explains fully elsewhere, Abram was not the father of those of the Circumcision who did not follow in his steps (Rom.2:25-3:1). This we will consider more fully later. The Uncircumcision know him as their father on the ground of faith alone. The Circumcision may claim him only when they have the faith, the sign, and the walk.

     When I first went to Denmark, the saints there were much disturbed by some teaching that had reached them, that Romans was "Jewish" because it brought in Abraham. As soon as I pointed out that it referred to His faith before he was circumcised the whole matter was clear, and they no longer repudiated Romans and other epistles of Paul on such dubious grounds. Abraham before he was circumcised was certainly not one of the Circumcision. The faith that he then had was the ground of blessing which made him the father of the Uncircumcision who believe, apart from works. He was certainly not a Jew, a descendant of his great grandson, Judah, or of his grandson Jacob, who, later, were all called "Jews," when they associated with the descendants of Judah as worshipers of Jehovah.

p23
Abram is Father of those Who Have Faith Abraham, of those who Walk in Faith

     As circumcision is only an outward sign, its benefits are limited to those who have the corresponding inward reality. Those who walk flawlessly before God will be benefitted, but those who do not keep His law are practically uncircumcised. They are like an empty jar with a label. The label only misleads if the contents are gone. Another jar containing that which the label indicates, even if it has no label, is the real thing. Not only are the Uncircumcision who believe the real Circumcision (Phil.3:2,3), but the Jew who is circumcised in heart, in spirit not literally in the flesh is the genuine Circumcision. Nevertheless the outward sign entitled them to benefits not to be despised, the chief of which was that they became the repositories of God's revelation (Rom.2).


THE OBLIGATION OF CIRCUMCISION

     Circumcision lays an obligation on all who have it far beyond their capacity to pay. It is like a label guaranteeing that the whole law has been observed. Anyone who uses it thereby advertises his ability to get along without Christ and His sacrifice. Circumcision is the real falling "from" grace. It is a fearful load to take upon ourselves, when God has not laid it upon us. No one can live up to this label. It must inevitably lead to the curse that rests upon all who fail to fulfill the least item of God's law. So blind were the Jewish "believers" in Paul's day that they insisted that circumcision was necessary for the nations for their salvation! Rather it clinched their condemnation.

     The needlessness of circumcision for the nations is repeatedly emphasized by Paul in his epistles. It is so unimportant that it is not even worth the trouble to get rid of it. Each one is to remain as he was when God called him, either circumcised or uncircumcised. We ignore external nonessential labels and recognize only internal essential realities! For the Circumcision it is a precept of God to be kept. For us circumcision is nothing (1 Cor.7:17-20). In Christ Jesus neither cir-

p24
God's Righteousness, not Man's

cumcision is availing anything nor uncircumcision, but faith, operating through love (Gal.5:6). In Him there is a new creation (Gal.6:15). It was the self righteous Pharisees who opposed Paul and insisted on circumcision and law keeping (Acts 15:5; 21:21). Not having God's righteousness, they sought to make one of their own, and managed to make the opposite.

     The question of circumcision for the Uncircumcision was the cause of much grief and conflict during the early ministry of the apostle Paul due to the fact that circumcision was the hall-mark of Jehovah's people. When Paul returned to Antioch after his first missionary journey, the Jews, especially some from Judea, opposed him violently because he had not made proselytes nor had them circumcised nor put them under the law. The commotion became so severe that the matter was referred to the apostles in Jerusalem. Peter seems to have been the only one among the Circumcision who had any sympathy with Paul's position. Even he would not have understood if he had not been prepared by means of the vision which he saw at Joppa, and had not seen God's hand in dealing with Cornelius (Acts 10).

     Paul in his epistles, tells us far more about circumcision than any other inspired writer, even though he is the apostle of the Uncircumcision. This is due to the fact that the true intent of the rite was not understood, and that religious unbelievers still clung to their own flesh and its works. Once we see the great contrast between Abram and Abraham, between faith and works, between God's righteousness and man's, between Paul's evangel and Peter's, our hearts will be filled with exultation that we did not receive a probationary pardon which depends upon our deeds, but were justified by grace apart from works dependent entirely upon faith in God. We are weak and wanting. He is the All-Sufficient!
A. E. K.

[Seth]

I wasn't planning on it. Do you think I should?

I think posting whole article after whole article is not in the spirit of a discussion forum myself.

[Tom]

Well, I thought I was just showing an alternative to what seems to be the accepted theology of the forum, but, since I've offended you, I'll quit posting.