by Pastor Veron J. Peterman, D.Min

Paul acknowledges his Jewishness in the verse prior to Galatians 2:16, 17.  As ‘Jewish’ as Paul was, he knew that a man was not to be justified by the works of the law, but through faith in Jesus Christ.  In verse 16 he states:  (1) a man is not justified by the works of the Law; (2) justified not by the works of the Law; and (3) by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

Paul takes great pains here to state the negative, that the works of the Law are not a means to justification.  One might wonder why Paul states the same truth three times in 2:16.  Perhaps one reason is that he uses a different subject in each phrase. Note the change from one phrase to the next:  (1) a man is not justified by the works of the Law; (2) we may be justified by faith in Christ; and (3) by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

Paul contrasts the triple negative statement with triple positive statements regarding the means to justification in verse 16:  (1) justified…through faith in Christ Jesus; (2) we have believed in Christ Jesus; (3) so that we may be justified by faith in Christ.  Galatians 2:17 addresses what is an anticipated or previously revealed response by the Judaizers or their sympathizers.  Paul states it as a rhetorical question:  “…is Christ then a minister of sin?”  In typical Pauline fashion (see the pattern of rhetorical questions in his epistle to the church at Rome), he states the claim of his opposition.

What he is addressing here is what has been called in theological circles antinomianism or more commonly, utter lawlessness and wanton immorality.  In response the claim that freedom from the law will produce abject immorality, Paul says, “May it never be!”  He’s not going to stand for that retort from his accusers and opponents.  Paul anticipates that his opponents would state that the Law is needed to constrain sin the Christian, even though he is justified.  He tells them that he (the one who needed the so-called restraint of the Law) has been crucified, and that it is no longer him who lives, but the very person and character of Christ – who obviously needs no justification nor external restraint!  The objection is without merit.  Why would Christ need the Law or justification?  The Galatian churches’ problem was apparently not based on their misunderstanding of who Christ was, but rather what Christ accomplished and the sufficiency of His accomplishment on behalf of the sinner. 

According to the NET Bible, verses 16 and 20, Paul has three times in those two verses spoken of the faithful character of Christ.  His character is not lacking, it is in contrast to ours which is indeed lacking.  He finishes this part of his argument by saying that righteousness cannot come through the law.  It is in itself an insufficient restraint!  Only Christ’s life in the believer can be adequate for the living out of righteousness.  Even though the law may be righteous, it is external and does not change man’s essential character, much less his standing before God!  The Law is not the answer to man’s problem, because the law does not address the condition of the heart of a man, where the problem lies.  Christ, however, has addressed the problem of man’s heart, as the Law could never do.

The apostle makes a few more points in Galatians 4, teaching that a return to the Law is slavery.  He uses both a personal appeal (his relationship to them when present in Galatia) and an allegory he creates from Genesis to tell them that the Law is a return to slavery and ought instead to be ousted.  Now it is quite clear that these people he is referring to have not “lost their salvation.”  That would be inconsistent with many other statements by Paul himself.  Instead he is trying to get them to understand that one cannot mix justification by faith with justification by works.  By the same token, one cannot achieve sanctification by faith with sanctification by works either (cf. Gal. 3:3).