← Back to sermon library

For our meditation tonight, before 
we participate in the supper, our focus will be verses 6 to 
9, but I do want to read the chapter, then we'll pray, and 
then we'll look at that in some detail. So, beginning in Galatians 
chapter 1 at verse 1, Paul, an apostle, not from man nor through 
man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised 
him from the dead. And all the brethren who are 
with me, To the churches of Galatia, grace to you and peace from God 
the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for 
our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil age, 
according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory 
forever and ever. Amen. I marvel that you are turning 
away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ to 
a different gospel, which is not another, but there are some 
who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even 
if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you 
than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As 
we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any 
other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be 
accursed. For do I now persuade men or 
God? Or do I seek to please men? For 
if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ. 
But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached 
by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from 
man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation 
of Jesus Christ. For you have heard of my former 
conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure 
and tried to destroy it. And I advanced in Judaism beyond 
many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly 
zealous for the traditions of my fathers. But when it pleased 
God, who separated me from my mother's womb and called me through 
His grace to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among 
the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood, 
nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before 
me, but I went to Arabia and returned again to Damascus. Then 
after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter and 
remained with him 15 days. But I saw none of the other apostles 
except James, the Lord's brother. Now concerning the things which 
I write to you, indeed, before God, I do not lie. Afterward, 
I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, and I was unknown 
by face to the churches of Judea, which were in Christ. But they 
were hearing only, he who formerly persecuted us now preaches the 
faith which he once tried to destroy. And they glorified God 
in me." Amen. Well, let us pray. Father, we 
thank you for your word. We thank you for the... It's 
given by inspiration of God and that it's profitable for doctrine, 
for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. 
And we pray now that the Holy Spirit would guide us as we consider 
this passage, cause us to meditate upon, to contemplate over the 
richness and the glory of the gospel of our salvation. and 
cause us as well as the Church of Christ to reflect on our blessed 
privilege and our responsibility and duty to guard that Word, 
and help us to be faithful with that stewardship. Forgive us 
again for all sin and unrighteousness, and may Christ be glorified as 
we gather together tonight, as we remember Him specifically 
in the supper, His death on behalf of sinners, as the Lamb of God 
who takes away the sin of the world. And we pray in the name 
of the Lord Jesus, amen. Well, the book of Galatians was 
written by the apostle Paul after the first missionary journey. 
So the first missionary journey occurs in Acts chapter 13 and 
14, about the years AD 48 to 49. So Paul was sent out by the 
church. The spirit comes to the church 
in Antioch. says to the teacher, says to the elders there to separate 
Paul and Barnabas for the work that he had for that. So the 
church is instrumental in sending out missionaries. It's not to 
be disconnected from the church, but rather it is the church that 
sends out the missionaries. So Paul and Barnabas go out and 
they go to the region of Galatia. It was a region and they went 
specifically to the places in Southern Galatia. And as I said, 
those are mentioned in Acts chapters 13 and 14. They go to Pisidian 
Antioch, to Iconium, to Lystra, and to Derbe. And when they go 
there, they preach the gospel of justification by faith alone 
in Christ alone. They make disciples, they plant 
churches on the way back to Antioch, they stop in the churches, and 
they appoint elders in each of those particular churches. Well, 
as they returned to Antioch, there was a group of people that 
would visit those churches after the Apostle Paul. And those people 
are referred to in theology as Judaizers. And the Judaizers 
came along and they said, it's good that you've believed that 
Jesus is the Messiah. It's good that you believe that 
he is Israel's Messiah. So, not only do you need to believe 
in him, but you also need to get circumcised and you're obligated 
to keep the laws of Moses. You're obligated to supplement 
the finished work of Jesus with these other things in order to 
be accepted by God. Well, the Apostle Paul will have 
no truck with that kind of departure from the gospel of free grace. 
And that's why we see at the outset of his epistle, after 
a very brief greeting, he comes out of the gate to denounce this 
heresy. to correct these Galatians, to 
call them to a fidelity in Christ and a recognition that our salvation 
is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. It's not 
a mixture of my faith plus my works and then God may accept 
me. No, that's absolutely positively 
contrary to the gospel of Jesus Christ our Lord. So I want to 
look first at the astonishment of the apostle in verse 6, secondly, 
the defection of the Galatians in verse 7, and then thirdly, 
the curse upon heretics in verses 8 and 9. And as we come to this 
particular letter, I think that Machen was right. He said, the 
epistle to the Galatians is a polemic, a fighting epistle from beginning 
to end. What a fire it kindled at the 
time of the Reformation. May it kindle another fire in 
our day, not a fire that will destroy any fine or noble or 
Christian thing, but a fire of Christian love in hearts grown 
cold. So the object of this message 
tonight, it's not so much polemical to denounce Rome and to denounce 
federal vision and to denounce the new perspective on Paul, 
though we might do a little bit along the way, but it is to appreciate 
the gospel of our salvation, to appreciate the doctrine of 
justification by faith alone. To be able to sing with the hymn 
writer, nothing in my hand I bring, simply to thy cross I cling. Foul I to the fountain fly, wash 
me savior or I die. To be able to celebrate with 
the apostle Paul in Romans eight, when he says, there is therefore 
now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. If it 
depends even a little bit upon our works in order for our acceptance 
with God, we're doomed. We praise God for the finished 
work of our blessed Savior, His life, His death, His resurrection. We are dependent upon Him through 
and through. So let's look, first of all, 
at the astonishment of the apostle. Notice in verse six, I mentioned 
it's a very brief greeting. If you look at, say, for instance, 
1 Corinthians, in chapter one, he has a long and extended greeting. And if you're familiar with 1 
Corinthians, you'll know that he's got to deal with some pretty 
difficult things in that letter. He's got to deal with an incestuous 
relationship in 1 Corinthians chapter five. He's got to caution 
the people of God in terms of fleeing sexual immorality in 
1 Corinthians 6. He has to remind them that with 
reference to Christian liberty, they're not to destroy with their 
meat or their drink or whatever those for whom Jesus died. He 
has to remind them, or rebuke them rather, for their conduct 
at the Lord's table. So all of these things would 
indicate that he should have come out of the gate with them. 
Well, those are sanctification problems. I'm not suggesting 
that these persons in Galatia or in Corinth were necessarily 
going to go to hell, but Paul sees the problem, the jeopardy, 
the threat to the gospel of our salvation in Galatians chapter 
one. So he comes right out of the 
gate and he says, I marvel that you are turning away so soon 
from him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different 
gospel. Very gracious, very humble, very 
kind and compassionate man. He's the man that wrote 1 Corinthians 
chapter 13, the great love chapter. And yet when it comes to a threat 
on the doctrine of justification by faith, he says, I marvel. I'm amazed. I'm astonished. I 
can't believe my eyes. I'm not liking what I'm hearing 
about the churches in Galatia. You're supposed to reject and 
resist those kinds of men that would try to add your works vis-a-vis 
through Moses to try to make Christ sufficient or whole in 
terms of your acceptance with God. Notice the reality that 
they were turning away so soon from Him who called you in the 
grace of Christ. And notice as well, this is a 
first century church. Sometimes you'll meet believers 
today and they'll say, we need to get back to the early church. 
Which early church? Corinth, where there was incest 
going on in the context of the local church? Or to Galatia, 
the churches in southern Galatia, where there was a defection from 
the gospel of Jesus Christ? See, sin has always been there. 
And even in the early church, they had remaining corruption, 
and there was this proclivity, or this tendency, or this proneness 
to go after Moses to try to supplement Christ in order to be accepted 
with God. These Judaizers came with this 
particular intention. And then as well, notice what 
he says in terms of their position. They are turning away so soon 
from Him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different 
gospel. I wonder if we would consider 
it as a different gospel. We might be tempted to think, 
well, what's the problem? We have faith in Jesus plus circumcision. That seems like, well, sort of 
round out the whole situation and bring us happily into heaven. 
When we try to supplement the finished work of Jesus Christ, 
we're rejecting the finished work of Jesus Christ. You don't 
go at it with both and. You go at it in an either-or 
fashion. Again, J. Gresson Machen made 
the observation. Certainly, the point of difference 
between Paul and the Judaizers was no trifling difference, no 
matter how trifling it may seem to the modern church. We need 
to fight that tendency. Well, that's not that big of 
a deal. It's just a small distinctive. It's just a bit of a difference. 
That's the kind of stuff for theologians and those in the 
academic guild. That's just for the doctors in 
the church. No, every single Christian needs to understand 
doctrine of justification by faith alone. Every single Christian 
needs to know what it is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and 
what benefits accrue as a result under God's blessing. This is 
the one of a few, several doctrines that we must have firm grip on. There's other doctrines. You 
can be wrong in eschatology. You can be wrong in ecclesiology. 
We're not gonna de-church or de-save the Presbyterians or 
the Dutch Reformed or anything like that. But when it comes 
to justification by faith alone, as Machen says, this was a fire 
that Galatians kindled at the time of the Reformation. Why? 
Because Rome sounded just like these Judaizers. For Rome, it 
was believe the gospel plus do what the church tells you. Believe 
the gospel plus do these sacraments of the church. It was an attempt 
to supplement the finished work of our blessed Savior. And when 
we try to supplement that, we're actually denying that finished 
work of our Savior. We're confessing that it wasn't 
enough. So back to Machen, certainly 
the point of difference between Paul and the Judaizers was no 
trifling difference, no matter how trifling it may seem to the 
modern church. It was the difference between 
a religion of merit and a religion of grace. Man is all about a 
religion of merit. I do and then I get blessed. 
Well, the Bible and the message of grace says Christ has done, 
believe on him and you will be blessed. He goes on to say that 
Judaizer's teaching required a man to earn at least a part 
of his salvation by his own keeping of God's law. Paul saw clearly 
that to follow such teaching was to do despite to the cross 
of Christ. If we have to fill up even the 
slightest gap by our own works, then we are still lost in sin. 
For the awakened conscience sees clearly that our own works are 
insufficient to bridge even the smallest gap. We must trust Christ 
for nothing or for all. to trust him only for part, is 
the essence of unbelief. Again, I don't think we view 
it that way, and we need to. Machen's not a fake. Machen's 
not being hyperbolic. Machen is echoing the great tradition 
we call Protestantism. the reality that it's grace alone 
through faith alone in Christ alone. He says there are two 
ways of being saved according to the Apostle Paul. One way 
is to keep the law perfectly. If that's what you choose, well 
then know this. You have to do it perfectly. 
You have to do it absolutely. That way is closed because of 
sin, Machen says. The other way is to accept the 
gift of salvation, which Christ offers us freely by his cross. 
The two ways cannot both be followed. That is the burden of the epistle 
to the Galatians. A man must choose as the way 
of salvation, either law or grace. In bidding men choose the latter 
way, the apostle was contending for the very heart of the Christian 
religion. So Galatians 1, 6 to 9, and the 
rest of Galatians capitalizes on that particular theme. Either 
you choose to enter in based on a covenant of works, your 
own obedience to the law, which must be perpetual, it must be 
exact, it must be entire, or you're going to be cut off. Or, 
by the grace of God, you see Jesus as the champion. You see 
Jesus as the Savior. You see Jesus as the one in whom 
alone there is forgiveness and a righteousness that avails with 
God Most High. Now notice, secondly, the defection 
of the Galatians in verse 7. After saying, to a different 
gospel, he says in verse 7, which is not another. It's not like 
there's two gospels, choose your poison, take which one, you know, 
pleases you best. There is only one gospel, there's 
one good news, and it concerns the life, the death, and the 
resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. So when they turned away 
from Him who called them in the grace of Christ, grace of Christ 
to a different gospel. Paul says, that's not another 
gospel. You're being lied to. You're 
being deceived. You are being threatened. You 
are being distorted. You are being confused. If you 
choose to try and supplement the finished work of Jesus and 
then deny the finished work of Jesus, you're going to end up 
the loser as a result of this. The Judaizing heresy was simply 
that, adding the works that we see in the Old Covenant, vis-à-vis 
the Mosaic ceremonial law, the particular emphasis in the Book 
of Galatians is on circumcision, trying to do that in addition 
to Jesus in order to be saved. And you can hear the logic of 
the Judaizers. I mean, these were predominantly 
Gentile peoples in the region of southern Galatia. Well, you 
know, we had to get circumcised as Jews and when we, you know, 
we believe on Jesus, but if we had to, then you have to too. 
So it's almost like it's not enough to be a believer in Jesus. 
You've also got to be a Jew as well. You've got to subscribe 
to the Mosaic ordinances and you've got to comply with those 
in order to be accepted with God. That's why Paul constantly 
thundered the doctrine of justification by faith alone. This is why he 
constantly fought for it and proclaimed it. Notice chapter 
3 verses 1 to 3 is the evidence of this. Chapter three, verse 
one, oh foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you that you should 
not obey the truth before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly 
portrayed among you as crucified. How do you think Jesus Christ 
was clearly portrayed as crucified among the Galatians? Did they 
have the Jesus film? Did they have the passion? No, 
it was through the proclamation of the gospel. It was through 
the preaching of the truth that they set forth Christ and all 
of his offices to save, prophet, priest, and king. He goes on 
to say, this only I want to learn from you. Did you receive the 
spirit by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith? Are 
you so foolish? Having begun in the spirit, are 
you now being made perfect by the flesh? Have you suffered 
so many things in vain, if indeed it was in vain? Turn over to 
chapter four. It makes a covenantal comparison 
and specifically with reference to the old covenant. Chapter 
four, verse 21. Tell me, you who desire to be 
under the law, do you not hear the law? Now when he says those 
who desire to be under the law, as a covenant of works in order 
to be accepted by God. He's not talking about the law 
and the life and the new covenant believer. He's not talking about 
the normative use of the law. He's not talking about Romans 
13. How do I know what love is relative to my brother or sister? 
Well, don't murder him. don't steal from him, don't commit 
adultery with his spouse. There is objective law-keeping 
in terms of New Covenant obedience, but it's the normative use. It's 
not as a covenant of words in order to try and comply your 
way into heaven. That's the emphasis in Galatians. He's not denigrating the law, 
he is denigrating the attempt to enter into the presence of 
God vis-à-vis the law. Because man is sinful, man is 
wretched, man does not obey exactly, entirely, and perpetually, and 
that is precisely what God demands. And yet Christ has, so the way 
of salvation is to believe on Him, and He grants access to 
the Father, through the Son and the Spirit. So tell me, you who 
desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? For it 
is written that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondwoman, 
the other by a free woman. But he who was of the bondwoman 
was born according to the flesh, and he of the free woman through 
promise, which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants, 
the one from Mount Sinai, which gives birth to bondage, which 
is Hagar. For this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds 
to Jerusalem, which now is, and is in bondage with her children. 
But the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of Abraham. 
It's talking about old covenant, new covenant. It's talking about 
old covenant of works, where the children of Israel stood 
at the base of Sinai and said, all that the Lord has commanded, 
we will do. And they didn't do it. They were saved by virtue 
of the new covenant that was coming. They broke the covenant 
of works that they had sworn fidelity to. So Paul says, you 
don't want to go back to that. You've got the new covenant. 
You've got Jesus. You've got the way of access. 
You've got provision. A little circumcision may seem 
like a little thing. But it's not. It is to renounce 
fully the gospel of Jesus Christ our Lord. Turn over to chapter 
5, verse 1, stand fast, therefore, in the liberty by which Christ 
has made us free. And that liberty specifically 
is from the bondage of sin, the power of Satan, and brought into 
the redemptive benefit that Christ secures. And he says, do not 
be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. For Paul, the law 
used lawfully is not bondage. For Paul, the law used unlawfully 
is bondage. And that's the point here. He 
says, Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, 
Christ will profit you nothing. Now, no, brethren, Paul is not 
condemning circumcision as an ethnic practice, as a cultural 
norm. In Acts 16, when he goes on the 
second missionary journey, he gets a companion by the name 
of Timothy. And Timothy had a father who 
was a Greek. And Timothy was not circumcised at that time 
when Paul met him. They were going to go into Jewish 
regions. So Paul had Timothy circumcised. That was not a religious thing. 
That was not acceptance with God. It was to not make waves 
with the Jews in the regions where they were going to engage 
in missionary endeavors. So circumcision as a cultural 
practice, circumcision as an ethnic practice, Paul doesn't 
have a problem with that. It's when you think that circumcision 
makes you more acceptable in the sight of God Most High. you 
are negating the gospel of free and sovereign grace. So notice 
again in verse 2, indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become 
circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. Now here's the rub, 
verse 3, and I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised 
that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. So the point is, is 
that if you choose law, and circumcision happens to be that one aspect, 
you're obligated to keep the entirety of the law. It's either 
covenant of works, your keeping of the law for acceptance with 
God, or it's Christ's keeping of the law, and that imputed 
to you and received by faith alone by virtue of the new covenant 
of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. So the identification 
of the heresy is very obvious. It is very, very clear when you 
survey this particular epistle. So going back to chapter one, 
verse seven. Oh, I'm sorry, go back to chapter 
five. There's a verse that I think a lot of us just don't get. After 
he says that, notice what he says in verse four. You have 
become estranged from Christ. You attempt to be justified by 
law. You have fallen from grace. Now, 
typically that phrase, you have fallen from grace, is pulled 
out of the Bible, pulled out of this context, and it's made 
to teach that a sinner saved by grace can ultimately be lost. He or she can fall from grace. It is a rejection of the doctrine 
of perseverance of the saints. In some churches, it's called 
eternal security. Some people rail against that. 
I think there's a reason to rail against that, but I also think 
there's a reason to embrace it. We are eternally secured because 
of what Jesus Christ has accomplished for us on the cross. So the fall 
from grace is not, oh, you can lose your salvation. The fall 
from grace in this context is that when you choose the law 
as a covenant of works, For your acceptance with God, you have 
turned from the gracious new covenant and its approach to 
God through faith alone in Jesus Christ. John Eady said, Christ's 
method of justification is wholly of grace. And those who rely 
on law and merit are in opposition to grace, are fallen out of it. The clause has really no bearing 
on the doctrine of perseverance of the saints or on their possible 
apostasy. There's other passages that one 
could go to to try and teach that, but it's not Galatians 
5.4. The fall from grace there is 
to deny the gracious new covenant and to throw yourself back in 
to the works-oriented law covenant, the old covenant. Fisher, in 
his wonderful book, Merrill of Modern Theology, he says, so 
that if you desire to be justified before God, you must either bring 
to him a perfect righteousness of your own and wholly renounce 
Christ, or else you must bring the perfect righteousness of 
Christ and wholly renounce your own. Christ Jesus will either 
be a whole Savior or no Savior. He will either save you alone 
or not save you at all. Now, lots of quotes, lots of 
theology. Let's get real practical. The 
apostle is saying that there is one way of acceptance with 
God, and that one way of acceptance with God is gracious. Why would 
we balk at that? Why would we want to try to introduce 
works into that, especially our works? If we know ourselves rightly, 
we ought to appreciate the accent on grace alone through faith 
alone in Christ alone. Because we know the prophet Isaiah, 
for instance, on behalf of the nation of Israel, cries out to 
Yahweh and says that all our righteousness is like filthy 
rags in your sight. And in the context, it was religious 
worship. It was what they were obligated 
to do. It was what God or Yahweh had 
called them unto in terms of their covenant responsibility. 
So they say our righteousness is like filthy rags. That doesn't 
even begin to get at our sins. Remember Jesus in Matthew chapter 
12 says that men will give an account for every idle word on 
the day of judgment. Think about that. How many idle 
words do we vomit out in a given day? Just think about the blasphemies. Think about the lies. Think about 
the gossip. Think about the slander. Are 
you sure you want to try to get to God on your own? Or get to 
God with just a wee bit of help from Jesus? No. It's either all 
Jesus or no Jesus. That's the message of Galatians. 
And let me encourage you that all Jesus is the only way to 
go. Because there is no other name 
given under heaven among men by which we must be saved. It 
is Christ alone who brings redemption. It is Christ alone who ushers 
us into the presence of God. It is Christ alone who brings 
us. not only a forgiveness for sins, 
but the righteousness that he accomplished in his 33 years 
on earth. That's why this is so important. That's why Paul marvels, why 
he's astonished. I can't believe you're going 
to turn away. I can't believe you're going to renounce Christ 
and try to go it on your own. You're gonna renounce Christ 
and try to supplement? You're gonna try to add to it? 
You're gonna suggest that what Christ has accomplished wasn't 
enough to get you over the finish line? Banish the thought, perish 
the thought. It is Christ and Him only that 
brings salvation. And as we move through this particular 
passage, we see something consistent with our studies in John's gospel. I mentioned this last week. Notice 
in verse seven, which is not another, but there are some who 
trouble you. This is troublesome. If the church 
is not troubled with false doctrine, then the church isn't thinking 
clearly. If the church is okay with false doctrine, if the church 
is okay with threats against the integrity of the gospel, 
if the church says, well, you know, we've got other bigger 
things, bigger fish to fry. I mean, there's homeless people, 
there's hungry people, there's all kinds of people out there. 
You know, this doctrinal sort of emphasis is sort of not our 
bag. Brethren, if we are not upset, if we are not perplexed, 
if we are not in prayer, if we are not seeking to defend the 
integrity of the Christian gospel, we might as well just depart 
from the church altogether and go join the Lions Club. There's 
other agencies out there that can ameliorate the downtrodden 
and the poor. Certainly that's an aspect of 
church life, but the thing that makes us markedly different is 
the gospel of our salvation. It is the truth as it is in Jesus. 
It is that faith once for all delivered to the saints that 
we have been charged to contend earnestly for. When the church 
is indifferent to doctrine, the church is in her darkest hours. 
When the church is on fire for truth, when she's fighting, when 
she's going forward, when she's persevering, when she's engaging, 
those are her finest hours. So Paul says they trouble you, 
and then notice what he says, and they want to pervert the 
gospel of Christ. I made the distinction last week. 
There's just some not very bright bulbs that preach. There are 
some guys that just aren't smart, and we don't want to charge them 
as, you know, they're god-haters, they're perverters of the gospel. 
There's other guys that are smart. There's other guys that know 
what they're doing. And they want to pervert the gospel, just 
like John 8, 44. The desires of your father, the 
devil, you want to do. It's not that you're neutral. 
It's not that you've fallen into these things. It's that you've 
actively pursued these things as a manner of rebellion against 
the living and true God, and as a means by which you can plague 
the church of the Lord Jesus Christ. So Paul highlights that 
reality in verse 7, which is not another, but there are some 
who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. Listen 
to John's thought. To tamper with the gospel is 
to trouble the church. Indeed, the church's greatest 
troublemakers now, as then, are not those outside who oppose, 
ridicule, and persecute it, but those inside who try to change 
the gospel. Conversely, the only way to be 
a good churchman is to be a good gospelman. That's great! Be a good gospelman. That means 
you'll be a good churchman. The best way to serve the church 
is to believe and to preach the gospel. Martin Luther had his 
unique way of saying the same thing. He says, that work which 
is built up of long labor may be overthrown in a night. A man 
may labor half a score of years to build up some little church 
to be rightly ordered. And when it is so ordered, there 
creeps in some malbrain, yea, a very unlearned idiot, and in 
one moment overthrows all. Now that we don't resist this, 
that we don't reject this, that this doesn't bother us, we're 
not of the same spirit of the Apostle Paul. I marvel, I marvel 
that so soon after the reception of this treasure, This stewardship 
that you've been given, you're quickly deserting, you're turning 
away. You're going after these guys 
who have no vested interest in your soul. They're troubling 
you. They want to pervert the truth as it is in Jesus. They 
want to engage in things that are contrary to the written word 
that you have received. We need to be like Paul in that. 
And then notice thirdly, the curse that he pronounces in verses 
eight and nine. This is heavy. This is powerful. This shows the gravity of the 
situation. Notice what he says. First of 
all, let's look at the extent of the curse. Verse 8. But even 
if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you 
than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. to 
the extent of the curse pronounced by Paul upon those who pervert 
the gospel of our Lord. There's no apostolic immunity, 
no apostolic immunity. Notice Paul includes himself 
in verse 8, but even if we, if it were the case that Paul followed 
up his first missionary journey, returned to those churches of 
Southern Galatia after the Judaizers had departed, and Paul said, 
oh yeah, those guys were right. I neglected to tell you that 
in my first preaching ministry. I neglected to tell you, yes, 
you need to be circumcised. Yes, you're obligated to keep 
the laws of Moses. Yes, you need to do that in addition to belief 
in Jesus so that God may accept you. Paul says, if I did that, 
then what I'm about to say, may it fall upon my head. But notice, 
there's no angelic immunity. If it were the case that a holy 
angel fell out of heaven and assumed a position of preaching 
in a pulpit, and he twisted the gospel of free and sovereign 
grace, then Paul's curse rests on him as well. And then later 
he extends it to anybody. So there's no immunity. There's 
no safe haven. There's no hiding place for those 
who want to pervert the gospel. of our Lord Jesus Christ. The 
gospel embodies a core, a fixed tradition, which is normative. The church has been given this. 
It is delivered to the saints, and therefore the saints are 
supposed to hold fast to it, they're supposed to defend it, 
they're supposed to fight for it, they're supposed to protect 
it. Now notice the gravity of the 
curse. So verse 8, even if we, or an 
angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what 
we have preached to you, let him be accursed. Now the word 
employed here is the word anathema. You may have heard that word 
before. Anathema. It's the Greek word. Some translations 
just leave it there as anathema. Here we have it translated as 
accursed. It means something devoted to 
God. And that something devoted to 
God could be a good thing or it could be a bad thing. The 
same word appears in Luke 21, where there's devotions, things 
given to God. But the background is a Hebrew 
word called haram. That's the particular word in 
view. And that means under the ban. Something that is devoted, 
but in a negative sense. It's devoted to destruction. It's devoted to suffering. It's devoted to decimation. In fact, let's turn back to the 
Old Testament and see two uses. Leviticus chapter 27. Leviticus 
chapter 27. Again, this underscores the gravity 
involved of Paul's message here. Leviticus chapter 27, specifically 
at verse 29. No person under the ban, This 
is haram, or in the New Testament, the Greek word is anathema. Who 
may become doomed to destruction among men shall be redeemed, 
but shall surely be put to death. Now turn over to Joshua, Joshua 
chapter seven. You see an actual act of this 
in the life of Israel. Joshua chapter seven. Remember when they went on their 
campaign to decimate cities, there were certain times where 
they were prohibited from taking the booty, from taking any spoil, 
from receiving anything unto themselves. Well, Achan, you 
know, he rejected that. Achan stole. Achan, you know, 
covered up and Achan, you know, hid stuff in his tent. Look at 
chapter 7 and verse 12. Therefore the children of Israel 
could not stand before their enemies, but turn their backs 
before their enemies because they have become doomed to destruction. Neither will I be with you anymore 
unless you destroy the accursed from among you." Now turn back 
to the New Testament. So the idea is devoted to destruction, 
doomed to destruction. When we see this word in our 
Bibles and it says accursed, I think, yeah, sounds bad. It 
does. I mean, it wouldn't be good to 
be accursed, would it? But to kind of explore the passage 
or to explore the use and explore the meaning a little bit, I think, 
again, underscores the gravity involved. Now, Paul uses this 
word several times in the New Testament. You can turn to Romans 
chapter 9. Romans chapter 9. And in this specific passage, 
he is evidencing his love for his nation. Notice in Romans 
chapter 9, specifically in verse 1, I tell the truth in Christ, 
I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the 
Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and continual grief in 
my heart. For I could wish that I myself were, here it is, anathema 
or accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen, according 
to the flesh. You see what Paul is saying there? 
Heart of compassion. I wish I could be devoted to 
destruction if it meant my countrymen, according to the flesh, could 
enter into heaven. Moses does something similar 
in the Old Testament relative to the people of Israel. Really 
shows the heart of the love of the pastor of the people of God. 
He's willing, if it were possible, to take for them that devotion 
to destruction. Turn to 1 Corinthians chapter 
12. 1 Corinthians chapter 12. Use of anathema there. specifically 
at verse one. Now concerning spiritual gifts, 
brethren, I do not want you to be ignorant. You know that you 
were Gentiles carried away to these dumb idols, however you 
were led. Therefore, I make known to you that no one speaking by 
the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed. And no one can say 
that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit. So no one speaking 
by the Spirit of God would ever dare say Jesus is devoted to 
destruction, under the ban, that he's somehow a bad thing. And 
then look at 1 Corinthians chapter 16. There's some question concerning 
singing or praying the Psalms of David that are imprecatory 
in nature. The imprecatory Psalms are those 
Psalms where the psalmist is calling down the judgment of 
God upon his enemies. He's not calling down the judgment 
of God upon his own enemies. This guy cut me off on the road 
today, Lord. I was on Wellington. He just bounced right out there. 
God, kill him, get him, destroy him. No, that's not the emphasis 
in the imprecatory Psalms. One instance is Psalm 119. He 
says, do I not hate those who hate thee, O Lord? I hate them 
with a perfect hatred. Psalm 58, he talks about the 
righteous dancing in the blood of the wicked. There are those 
imprecatory psalms that express the justice that is built into 
us by God Most High. And it is a way for us, as the 
Church of Jesus Christ, to give place to wrath. Paul cautions 
us in Romans 12, do not avenge yourselves, brethren, but give 
place to wrath. Well, how do we give place to 
wrath? We pray the imprecatory psalms. Now, of course, people 
in our modern church say, well, that can't be. That's the spirit 
of not goodness. You can't ever call down God's 
judgment upon anybody. Look at 1 Corinthians chapter 
16 and tell me if Paul the apostle would have a problem with the 
imprecatory Psalms of David. I submit that the imprecatory 
Psalms of David, in some sense, is a walk in the park compared 
to what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 16, 22. If anyone does not love 
the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema. Let him be devoted 
to destruction. Let him be doomed. That's Paul's 
language relative to those who would reject the gospel of free 
and sovereign grace. So back to Galatians chapter 
one. If you think it's a small thing 
that Somebody twists, somebody adds, somebody takes away, somebody 
distorts, or somebody confuses the gospel. You're not thinking 
like Paul. This word, according to one dictionary, 
means he who preaches a false gospel is delivered to destruction 
by God. Again, it is not a matter of 
an act of church discipline in the sense of excommunication. 
The curse exposes the culprits to the judicial wrath of God. 
That's Paul's emphasis in Galatians 1 verse 9. Even if we, or an 
angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what 
we have preached to you, let him be anathema. As we have said 
before, so now I say again, why Because repetition causes the 
receiver to understand the importance of the particular theme that 
is repeated. As we have said before, so now 
I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than 
what you have received, let him be accursed. The preacher of 
another gospel, Edy says, exposes himself to the divine indignation, 
and the awful penalty incurred by him is not inflicted by man. 
He falls into the hands of the living God. That's Paul's words 
to those who trouble you. to those who pervert the gospel 
of Jesus Christ our Lord, who teach that Christ is good, but 
he's not enough. You just need to supplement a 
bit by going to get circumcised. And once you do that, then you'll 
be wholly accepted by God most high. That flies in the face 
of all that Christ has accomplished. That is to resist and reject 
all that Christ has accomplished. If we choose that means or path, 
then we have denounced or denied the gospel of Jesus Christ our 
Lord. So in conclusion, we ought to 
appreciate, we ought to at least notice the intolerance of Paul 
Again, Machen says, to the men that dominate the life of the 
modern church, now he's writing in the early part of the 20th 
century. Think about that. He's writing in the early part 
of the 20th century. We've come a long way, baby, 
and not in a good way. There's been some major defection 
going on. There's been some major, you 
know, trajectory life-altering bad decisions made ecclesiastically 
and theologically and soteriologically. So he's dealing with, for the 
most part, in terms of threats to the gospel of Jesus Christ, 
German neo-orthodoxy or theological liberalism. So for Machen, that 
was not another species of Christianity, but an altogether different religion. 
I suspect that Machen would brand some of the approaches that we 
use today to get to God as altogether different species and not subset 
or connected to Christianity. So he says, to the men that dominate 
the life of the modern church, it would seem to be a subtle, 
hair-splitting distinction at the most. Surely, they would 
say, Paul ought to have made common cause with those Judaizers 
who had such a zeal for righteousness, and furthermore, exalted the 
Lord Jesus Christ so high. You see that tendency today. 
We're going to compromise the doctrine of justification by 
faith alone to circle the wagons with guys who are good on culture? 
I think you can be both. I don't think you have to have 
an either-or approach. You can be right on culture and 
maintain fidelity relative to justification by faith alone. 
It's not the case, well, you know, we've got to go over there 
because they're really combating the culture. You know what combats 
the culture? It's theological orthodoxy. It is the church preaching the 
gospel of Jesus Christ. It is the church doing what the 
church is called to do. That's the best way we challenge 
culture. That's the best way we deal with 
culture. We do what God commanded us to 
do. That, or therein, is safety. He goes on to say, as a matter 
of fact, the apostle did nothing of the kind. What he actually 
said with respect to the Judaizers was, let them be anathema. He seemed to have none of the 
modern virtue of tolerance at this point. So the intolerance 
of Paul then, my second observation is the intolerance of the church 
today. Brethren, we want to be tolerant in terms of, you know, 
every tribe, tongue, people, and nation. We want to be tolerant 
of people from different backgrounds. We want to be tolerant of, you 
know, different socioeconomic groups. We want to be tolerant 
insofar as we are able. But we're not to be tolerant 
at the point of the gospel of Jesus Christ our Lord. We as 
the church need to be aware of a doctrinal indifference. Oh, 
it really doesn't matter. Yes, it most certainly does matter. 
We need to be careful of a doctrinal imprecision. Oh, you reform people. You're always dotting I's and 
crossing T's. There's a whole world out there 
to be saved. What are you going to save them 
with? The Judaizing heresy? What are you going to save them 
with? A Jesus that is not Jesus? What are you going to save them 
with? A God that doesn't have the ability because you've stripped 
from Him all those perfections that are absolutely requisite? 
Beware of doctrinal departures. A departure from the truth should 
be evident and recognized by the Christian church. I've said 
it before and I'll say it again. If I come up here and I preach 
heresy, tell Cam and he'll break my neck, And I mean that spiritually 
speaking. I don't want to be too vicious 
or unkind. Or call Pastor Kirkpatrick, call 
Pastor Maljars. Brethren, don't sit under heresy. 
Don't sit under a departure from the truth. Don't sit under a 
man that's going to teach you faith in Jesus. plus something 
else in order to be accepted by God. That is false. That is a perversion. That is 
a departure. That is an apostasy. And it is 
not to be entertained in the life of Christ's church. Beware 
of doctrinal compromise. Again, we have great fellowship 
with people that don't see eye to eye on every other thing. Probably the bestest friend I've 
got in Chilliwack, in terms of a pastoral colleague, is a Paedo-Baptist. That's fine. We never talk about 
it. We don't arm wrestle about it, and he'd probably win. I 
don't think that makes his position right. But the bottom line is, 
When it comes to this other stuff, when it comes to compromise over 
the gospel, no. We'll compromise on eschatology. I think premillennialism is wrong, 
but come to our church, praise God with us, enjoy life together 
and worship and adore and bless the risen savior. But when it 
comes to compromise with a papist at the level of soteriology, 
when it comes to compromise with a federal visionist or a new 
perspective on Paul at the level of soteriology, You'll hear things 
like, well, you know, isn't he right? He got the Gospels right. He got the historicity of Jesus 
right. Yeah, but he gets soteriology 
wrong. He gets Paul wrong. Read Machen. He got the New Testament right, 
and he got justification right. In a world where there's books 
printed of J. Gresson Machen, read him versus 
N. G. Wright. We don't compromise 
with people that want to add to the finished work of our blessed 
Savior. And beware of doctrinal novelty, 
something new. Brethren, I've got to say this, 
if in 20 centuries of Christ's Church, the best and brightest 
theologians didn't see something, it's most likely not there. Oh, 
I found this new discovery in the Scripture. Now, I'm not saying 
you're necessarily wrong, but I am saying you're most likely 
wrong. When it comes to theology, I think Charles Hodge had a great 
statement concerning the founding of Princeton Theological Seminary, 
which unfortunately today has not held fast to Charles Hodge's 
words. He says, we strive to have no 
new thoughts here. We want no new thoughts at Princeton. 
What does he mean by that? He means that we are going to 
contend for that faith that was once for all delivered to the 
saints. It is our stewardship, it is our trust, it is sacred 
between God and us, and we're not going to relinquish our responsibility 
in that. So beware of doctrinal novelties. If Calvin and Luther and John 
Owen and C.H. Spurgeon didn't see it, most 
likely, and I hate to shatter your little mindset of snowflakeness, 
but you probably haven't seen it either. Now, one final passage, 
Galatians 2.21. I think it summarizes the entirety 
of Paul's message. after highlighting, after pointing 
out, after driving home the reality that we're justified by faith 
alone. Look at verse 16, for instance, 
in chapter two. Knowing that a man is not justified 
by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. Even 
we have believed in Christ Jesus. that we might be justified by 
faith in Christ and not by the works of the law. For by the 
works of the law no flesh shall be justified. But if, while we 
seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, 
is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not. For if 
I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a 
transgressor. For I through the law died to 
the law that I might live to God. I have been crucified with 
Christ. It is no longer I who live, but 
Christ lives in me. And the life which I now live 
in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved 
me and gave himself for me. We typically use Galatians 2.20 
as a sanctification passage. I don't think it is. I think 
it's a justification passage. Paul's gonna deal with sanctification 
in the latter part of the epistle. He's making a, theological or 
soteriological point in terms of justification. Verse 20, I 
have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but 
Christ lives in me. And the life which I now live 
in the flesh, I live by faith in the son of God who loved me 
and gave himself for me. Now notice verse 21, I do not 
set aside the grace of God for if righteousness comes through 
the law, then Christ died in vain. That's the point. If you could make it to heaven, 
if you could work out your salvation or work for your salvation, if 
all you needed was a little help from Jesus, then the whole cross 
was in vain. It's either all of Christ or 
none of Christ. And it's imperative that we go 
the way of the Savior himself. Machen says this verse is the 
key verse of the epistle to the Galatians. It expresses the central 
thought of the epistle. The Judaizers attempted to supplement 
the saving work of Christ by the merit of their own obedience 
to the law. That, says Paul, is impossible. Christ will do everything or 
nothing. Earn your salvation if your obedience 
to the law is perfect, or else trust wholly to Christ's completed 
work. You cannot do both. You cannot 
combine merit and grace. If justification, even in the 
slightest measure, is through human merit, then Christ died 
in vain. I submit that that brother was 
absolutely positively right on that comment on Galatians 2.21. We have a rich heritage in the 
Reformed tradition. We have a sacred deposit given 
in the Old and New Testaments. We have the Gospel as our treasure. It is our job to fight for it. 
It is our job to protect it. It is our job to defend it. And 
it's our job to meditate upon it and let it roll over us and 
cause us to reflect upon the great love of God in Christ Jesus 
for us, and may we respond with love back to Him for the finished 
work of the Savior. Well, let us pray. Our gracious 
God and Father, we thank you for the gospel of our salvation. 
We thank you for this section of Holy Scripture, which underscores 
the importance of the gospel. And God as well, may it be such 
an encouragement, the balm of Gilead to our own hearts. As 
we come weary to the table, may you encourage our hearts, may 
you strengthen us. May we reflect upon the Lord Jesus Christ, and 
may that faith grow in Him, and may that love for Him grow as 
well. We thank you for this church. 
We thank you for one another, that at the supper we not only 
commune with our blessed God, but we commune with your people. We commune with one another. 
We pray now through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.