Paul’s Gospel
Galatians 2:15–21
Finally, we arrive at Paul’s explanation of the theological error of those who wanted to require circumcision of the †Gentile Christians: they have a false understanding of the basis of our relationship with God. This section of the letter (Gal 2:15–21) briefly states the fundamental doctrinal teaching of Galatians. Just as a student writing a composition states his or her main idea before presenting the evidence in support of the thesis, this section, and especially verse 16, is Paul’s thesis statement, for which he will present arguments in the doctrinal part of the letter (3:1–5:12).
Paul’s Thesis Statement (2:15–16)
15We, who are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles, 16[yet] who know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
OT: Ps 143:2; Ezek 36:22–32
NT: Rom 1:18–32; 3:20–26
Catechism: justification, 1987–96
[2:15]
Paul begins by describing the position of the Jewish Christians, including Peter and himself, using the first-person plural: We . . . are Jews by nature, meaning, by birth. As Jews, he says, we do not belong to the category of sinners from among the Gentiles. Here Paul presupposes the Jewish evaluation of the †Gentile world as morally corrupt because it lacked knowledge of God and of his †law.1 The judgment that Gentiles are sinners and unclean in contrast to Jews, who keep the law and are righteous (Ps 1:2–5), was one of the motives of the †Judaizers to avoid eating with Gentile Christians.
BIBLICAL BACKGROUND
What Does It Mean to Be Justified?
Understanding †justification can be a bit challenging, in part because English uses words derived from two roots, just- and right- (just, justice, justify, justification, righteous, righteousness) to translate Greek words based on a single root, dik-. Besides that, English translations of the Bible differ in the terminology they employ.
In the Old Testament, to be righteous or just (dikaios in the †Septuagint) meant to be like Noah, whose conduct was good, in harmony with God’s ways, and who therefore enjoyed a good relationship with him that included his acceptance and blessing (Gen 6:9). To be unrighteous or unjust meant to be someone whose conduct was evil and contrary to God’s ways, a condition that led to judgment and condemnation (Gen 18:23–19:13). For Israel, God’s †covenant people, righteousness primarily meant to live out faithfully their covenant relationship with God by keeping the †law they received through Moses (Deut 6:25). Righteous conduct was not a means of earning a good relationship with God, but of remaining in the covenant relationship God had graciously given them (Deut 7:6–14). To be justified (dikaioō in the Septuagint) originally meant to be judged as righteous by God because one’s conduct was good, in harmony with God’s ways. Faithful Jews hoped to be accepted as righteous, or justified, by God on the day of judgment as a result of keeping the law of Moses (Ps 37:28–29; Wis 3:1–9; Dan 12:2–3).
But in the light of his encounter with the risen †Lord, Paul understood righteousness and justification more deeply. He realized that the righteousness based on keeping the law was inadequate (Gal 3:10–11) and provisional (3:22–25; 4:1–5). He reflected on many Old Testament texts that spoke of the universality of sin (he quotes many of them in Rom 3:9–19) and concluded that no human being will be justified on the basis of their conduct, since no one is truly just or righteous in God’s sight (Pss 14:1–3; 143:2; Rom 3:10, 20).a Through the prophets God had promised to bring to pass an infinitely better way of addressing the problem of sin (Jer 31:31–34; Ezek 36:22–27). What was needed was for the person to be justified in a more radical sense—namely, to be made righteous by a divine act that not only grants forgiveness of sins but also transforms the person from within. The basis of this justification is Christ’s loving gift of himself on the cross for our sins (Gal 2:20). This discovery leads Paul to regard his previous righteousness based on keeping the law as “so much rubbish.” Instead Paul aims to “gain Christ and be found in him, not having any righteousness of my own based on the law but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God” (Phil 3:8–9).
Paul found confirmation in Scripture, especially Gen 15:6 and Hab 2:4, that the way human beings are justified is through †faith. Through faith in Jesus and baptism, the believer is united with him in his death and resurrection and receives his Holy Spirit.b This is true justification, which places a person in a harmonious relationship with God (see comment on Gal 3:6, p. 102).
Does justification by faith mean that conduct does not matter? Not at all. Paul, along with other New Testament authors, teaches that every person will someday face judgment before Christ on the basis of their works (Rom 2:5–11; 2 Cor 5:10).c Those who have persevered in faithfulness to Christ, in whom faith is at work through love (Gal 5:6), who have sown to the Spirit rather than the †flesh (6:8), will be judged by Christ as righteous (Matt 25:21, 23; 2 Tim 4:8). The New Testament refers to this positive final judgment sometimes as justification (Matt 12:36–37 RSV; Rom 2:13), sometimes as salvation (Rom 5:9–10; Phil 1:28). Like initial justification, final justification is founded on faith in Christ and his faithfulness toward us.
a. The Catholic Church believes that because of the special role in salvation history for which Mary was chosen (Luke 1:28), God preserved her from original sin and from actual sin. Nevertheless, even Mary was not justified because of her conduct; rather, her righteous conduct was possible because she was justified by †grace from before her birth on the basis of her Son’s future sacrifice (Catechism 491–93).
b. See Gal 2:19–20; 3:27–28; 4:4. First Corinthians 6:11 is particularly clear on the role of the Holy Spirit in justification: “You were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.”
c. See also John 5:28–30; Gal 6:7–9; Rev 20:12–13.
[2:16]
Paul’s response is to point out that Jewish Christians implicitly recognize that their own previous standing before God was also compromised, since even we have believed in Christ Jesus that we may be justified—that is, put in a right relationship with God. From the beginning of their proclaiming the †gospel at Pentecost, the apostles summoned everyone to †faith in Jesus to receive the forgiveness of sins that went beyond what was available under the Mosaic †law.2 Paul’s point is that Jewish Christians also believed in Christ to obtain forgiveness and be †justified. This implies that they recognized themselves to be sinners, even though they did not belong to the category of “sinners from among the Gentiles” (2:15). In addition, they recognized that they could not be justified by the law of Moses.
BIBLICAL BACKGROUND
What Are “Works of the Law”?
Throughout the history of interpreting Galatians there have been a variety of interpretations of what Paul means by “works of the †law.” St. Augustine, the Protestant Reformers, and many Christians have applied the term broadly to mean all good works, which they correctly insist cannot †justify a person. Some ancient and recent commentators have understood “works of the law” to refer exclusively or primarily to identity markers in the law of Moses that set apart the Jewish people from the †Gentiles, such as circumcision, a kosher diet, and observance of the Jewish liturgical calendar. In the opinion of these interpreters, the inclusion of Gentiles among God’s people in Christ makes these identity markers obsolete, at least for Gentile Christians. The third view is that “works of the law” refers to observance of the law of Moses as a whole, including both moral precepts and rules for religious conduct. Study of the contexts of the six places where Paul uses this phrase indicates that the third view is preferable.a Whenever Paul speaks of “works of the law,” he refers to keeping the whole law of Moses.
Nevertheless, Paul’s focus in Galatians is indeed on Jewish id
entity markers such as circumcision and dietary rules that the †Judaizers wanted to require of Gentiles as well. It is likewise true that in other texts Paul speaks generically of “works,” without reference to the law of Moses, as inadequate for justification (Rom 4:2, 6), election (Rom 9:11), and salvation (Eph 2:8–9), confirming that Paul is also concerned to emphasize the primacy of divine grace and the radical insufficiency of human effort (Rom 11:6).
a. See Rom 3:20, 28; Gal 2:16; 3:2, 5, 10; in a majority of these contexts Paul explicitly refers to Jews. See the sidebar, “Paul’s Nuanced View of the Law,” pp. 146–47.
Paul’s analysis of the situation of the Jewish Christians was new because it showed the inadequacy of the common opinion that doing the works of the law ensured justification—that is, being judged righteous by God on the basis of one’s conduct. The problem with the common opinion was that it did not take into account the fact that Jews as well as †Gentiles find themselves in a state of sin, from which the law is radically incapable of freeing them (3:21). Elsewhere Paul explains that, by its nature, law cannot justify a sinner; it can only show that he or she is guilty and liable to punishment (3:21–23; Rom 3:20; 7:7–13; see the sidebar, “Paul’s Nuanced View of the Law,” pp. 146–47).
Thanks to Paul’s insight that following the law of Moses fails to resolve the problem of sin, he can combat the error at the root of the teaching of the †Judaizers. They placed observance of the law in a necessary role alongside faith in Christ for justification. In other words, they established their spiritual confidence on the dual foundation of faith in Christ and observance of the law. Paul, however, recognizes that these two foundations are incompatible. Whoever seeks justification through keeping the law aims at a righteousness of his or her own (Phil 3:9) and is thus engaged in a kind of self-justification. Whoever, on the other hand, puts his or her faith in Christ radically renounces self-justification and receives justification as a free gift from God, obtained through the passion of Christ, who suffered “for our sins” (Gal 1:4). This is the choice: to rely on works of the law or to believe in Christ. The Jewish Christians had chosen faith in Christ, but they needed to realize that they were thereby excluding works of the law as the basis of or a necessary means of maintaining a right relationship with God.
Paul strongly insists on this position here both because he is convinced it is true and because it is fundamental to the doctrinal discussion that follows. The structure of Paul’s sentence in verse 16 is stylistically magnificent and makes his message unmistakable:
[We] who know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ,
even we have believed in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law,
because by works of the law no one will be justified.
In one sentence Paul states his point three times! He employs three key terms—“justified,” “works of the law,” and “faith [or “belief”] in Christ”—and repeats them each three times.
The end of the sentence declares in an absolute way that by works of the law no one will be justified. With these words Paul supports his assertion by alluding to a psalm where the psalmist says to God,
Do not enter into judgment with your servant,
for no one living will be justified before you. (Ps 143:2 †LXX)
If no one living can be justified—that is, judged to be righteous—when God is judge, it follows that “works of the law” do not change that fact.
BIBLICAL BACKGROUND
“Faith in Christ” or “the Faithfulness of Christ”?
The phrases “†faith in Christ” (Gal 2:16; 3:22) and “faith in the Son of God” (2:20) have raised lengthy discussions among scholars because the Greek can be translated in a variety of ways.
The simplest and traditional interpretation followed by most English translations is to render the Greek phrase pistis Christou as “faith in Christ.” The central affirmation of verse 16 clearly has this meaning, since it says, “we have believed in Christ Jesus.” Consequently, the NABRE translates the two instances of pistis Christou in that verse as “faith in Christ.”
However, there are other ways of understanding the phrase. It is possible that Paul is referring to “faith from Christ,” with the nuance that Christ is the source of our faith. We have believed in Christ because Christ gave us the faith to do so.
Another possibility is to attribute pistis to Christ. If we translate pistis as “faith,” we have “the faith of Christ,” similar to “the faith of Abraham” (Rom 4:16). Galatians 3:6 says, “Abraham believed.” So did Christ believe? The difficulty is that neither Paul nor any other New Testament writer attributes the act of believing to Christ, even though the verb pisteuō, “to believe,” is used more than 240 times. This fact confirms that the New Testament does not regard Christ as a believer like everyone else: his relationship with God is of a completely different order.
However, there are two other meanings of pistis, either of which is appropriately attributed to Christ—namely, faithfulness or fidelity (see Rom 3:3–4) and trustworthiness. We can say that a person is †justified by Christ’s faithfulness to God and to us, manifested in his gift of himself for our sins in obedience to God’s will (see Gal 1:4). We can also say that a person is justified by the absolute trustworthiness of Christ, by Christ’s being the solid support on whom our faith rests. Every act of faith or trust between persons is always the encounter of pistis on two sides, one who offers a sturdy support and one who accepts that support. If a text speaks explicitly of a faith that relies on someone, it is speaking implicitly of a support that is offered by another. To be justified by the trustworthiness of Christ, it is necessary for us to rely on his trustworthiness—that is, to trust in him.
Although in some instances the context of pistis Christou may point to one interpretation rather than another, usually we are not forced to choose. We can recognize ourselves as justified by our faith in Christ at the same time we realize that we are justified by his faithfulness, and that his trustworthiness is a firm foundation for our faith.
The good news is that this same verse (Gal 2:16) explains how a person is justified. Rather than present oneself to God to be judged as righteous on the basis of one’s own observance of the law, one can believe in the †Messiah Jesus, which enables the person to receive God’s free gift of †grace that restores lost innocence and imparts righteousness to the sinner.
The Apostle begins here his vigorous battle against the assertions of the Judaizers that Gentile Christians must observe the law of Moses, an argument that he pursues without letup until the end of the letter.
Application to Peter’s Conduct (2:17–18)
17But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves are found to be sinners, is Christ then a minister of sin? Of course not! 18But if I am building up again those things that I tore down, then I show myself to be a transgressor.
[2:17–18]
After having clearly and vigorously set forth his thesis in verse 16, Paul confirms his point through a discussion of Peter’s conduct that is notoriously difficult to untangle.3 Verse 18, which is clearer, helps us understand verse 17. In verse 18 Paul has in mind the change in Peter’s conduct. By eating with †Gentile Christians, Peter had torn down, so to speak, the wall of Jewish separatism. The †Judaizers regarded this act as a culpable transgression. However, in reality it was based on Peter’s adherence to Christ. Seeking to be justified in Christ (v. 17), Peter had understood that he was free in regard to Jewish traditions. If Peter had been sinning by eating with Gentile Christians, one would have to conclude that Christ had led him to sin, making Christ a minister of sin, which is an absurd conclusion. Consequently, the premise must be utterly rejected. It cannot be said that Peter’s earlier behavior was sinful.
But when Peter later caved to the demands of the Judaizers and separated himself from Gentile Christians, he was building up again those things that he tore down—that is, Jew
ish separatism. It was then that he truly showed himself to be a transgressor (2:18). He was right when he tore down that wall, and “he clearly was wrong” (2:11) when he rebuilt it.4
Paul’s Confession (2:19–21)
19For through the law I died to the law, that I might live for God. I have been crucified with Christ; 20yet I live, no longer I, but Christ lives in me; insofar as I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God who has loved me and given himself up for me. 21I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing.
NT: Rom 6:6; 7:1–4; 2 Cor 5:14–15; Gal 5:24; 6:14
Catechism: justification, 1987–96
Lectionary: 2:19–20: St. Paul Miki and Companions; Common of Saints
Now Paul explains the basis of †justification by †faith and explains how his relationship with Christ changes his relationship to the †law of Moses.
Verses 19–21 are in the first-person singular. Paul describes his own situation as a Christian, not to depict an exclusive privilege afforded to him, but to illustrate the situation of every Christian. What Paul says in the preceding verses about justification would lack a foundation if Paul’s case were unique. This description is essential to his argument, and the style of these verses is well suited to their sublime content. There is a strong antithesis between death and life. There are bold paradoxes: to die to the law through the law, to die to †live, to live crucified with Christ. Here Paul describes a profound union with Christ that every baptized believer is called to live out.
[2:19]
Galatians Page 10