Living by Faith - Galatians

Malignant Churches and “Christians”

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Living by Faith

Lesson: 1-19

Genre: Talk

Track: 01

Dictation Name: Tape 01A

Location/Venue:

Year: ?

This is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He heareth us. Having these promises, let us draw near to the throne of grace with true hearts, in full assurance of faith. My voice shalt Thou hear in the morning oh Lord, in the morning will I direct my prayer unto Thee, and will look up. Let us pray.

Oh Lord our God unto whom all power and authority belongs, we come into Thy presence; we commit unto Thee our hopes concerning this year, the years ahead, concerning our country and ourselves. Thou knowest oh Lord how the heathen rage and take counsel together against Thy Son, Thy kingdom and Thy people, how they seek to destroy Thy work, and to establish the kingdom of the enemy. Oh Lord our God, Thou hast declared in Thy word that Thou dost laugh at them, and Thou wilt in Thy due time destroy them in their pride and arrogance. Give us oh Lord ever increasing faith; make us partakers of Thine heavenly laughter, that we might with boldness and confidence face the enemy, and might become more than conquerors through Christ our Lord. In His name we pray, amen.

Our scripture is from Paul’s letter to the Galatians 1:1-5. Our subject: Malignant Churches and “Christians”. The word Christians there belongs in quotes. Malignant Churches and “Christians”, Galatians 1:1-5.

“1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)

2 And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:

3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,

4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:

5 To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.”

As we have seen as we concluded our study of Romans, Paul’s letter to Romans is not the key issue which precipitated Luther’s Reformation. Luther lectured on Romans in the year 1515-1516. Then in 1516-17 he lectured on Galatians, and again almost twenty years later. The church historian (Bainton?) has said of these two studies, Romans and Galatians, that these studies proved to be for Luther his road to Damascus, the key factor in the Reformation. With this we cannot agree. It was the 95 theses which started the trouble, and the issue was the authority of the church. Aquinas in his commentary on Romans had not differed greatly, if we contrast the two, from Luther.

Two centuries or more earlier, Aquinas had said substantially the same thing. No trouble ensued. Of course that section of Aquinas writings is not popular today in many Catholic circles because of its similarity to Luther. Luther gave the centrality to Galatians in his experience. He rejected therefor any coupling of faith with works in justification, he spoke of himself as wedded to Galatians.

Now Calvin himself felt strongly about Galatians, and he said of Galatians that, and I quote: “he (Paul) argues... that we are justified in the sight of God by Free Grace, and not by the works of the Law...... First, the question could not be settled (by Paul) without assuming the general principle, that we are justified by the free grace of God; and this principle sets aside not only ceremonies, but every other kind of works. Secondly, Paul did not attach so much importance to Ceremonies as to the wicked doctrine of obtaining Salvation by Works. Let it be observed, therefore, that Paul had good reasons for recurring to first principles. It was necessary to go to the fountain, and to warn his readers that the controversy related, not to some insignificant trifle, but to the most important of all matters — the method of obtaining salvation.”

But was this point of view very different from that of Rome? There were differing stresses, but the differences were not as great as they were a few generations later, nor as different as they were two centuries later. And of course especially after Wesley, the differences within Protestantism were very great. Listen to what a Catholic commentator, a priest of this century, has said concerning Galatians and I quote John F. Rowan, a Catholic Biblical scholar: “The solution of this question” (That is, two whom this letter was addressed) “makes little difference as regards the teaching of the Epistle, that is, that justification and salvation are not to be had through the Mosaic Law, but through faith in Christ.”

Well, would Luther have said it any differently? Was that in fact really the problem? Galatians must be considered together with Romans, because while it was written to a different situation, it stands also on the premise which Paul cites in Galatians 3:11, “the just shall live by faith.”

Because we have Luther’s comments not only of 16-17, but also of 1535, we shall see where the point of divergence with Rome came in, and what the key issues were. There were differences between the Galatian scene and the Roman scene. The Emperor Augustus in 25 B.C. had formed the province of Galatia. The nucleus of this new province was the country of Galatia, and the word comes from Gaul, or Gail, or Celt. It was a Celtic country. It had been settled by a large, migrating group of Celts in the third century B.C. Their center was Ancyra now, and Tyra, the Turkish capital. Augustus added to Galatia, Pontus, and parts of Phrygia, and most of (Laconia?).

Now Paul, according to Acts, visited South Galatia, specifically Pisidian, Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. But his letter, was it written to North Galatia or South Galatia? Well, it is not our concern for two reasons: first, I don’t have the competency to judge either way, whether it was written to the North or the South, and second, our concern and my concern is with what Paul had to say, its relevance to us.

Now as Paul begins Galatians, he does it by placing himself beyond the criticism and control of his readers, because he is not writing to a friendly audience as in Rome, but he is writing to churches in Galatia which is plural, and could include churches throughout North and South Galatia, churches that are hostile to him, churches that have been propagandized against Paul. And so he says: “Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)”

So Paul says: ‘I am not a man created creature, it was Jesus Christ Himself who called me by special revelation; and therefore I am accountable to Him and not to you, nor to any group of men in Jerusalem or anywhere else. And of this Luther commented and I quote: “God calls us in two ways, either by means, or without means. Today He calls all of us into the ministry of the word by a mediated call, that is one that comes through means, namely through man. But the apostles were called immediately by Christ Himself, as the prophets in the Old Testament had been called by God Himself. After wards the apostles called their disciples, as Paul called Timothy, Titus, and others. These men called Bishops as in Titus 1:5 following, and the Bishops called their successors down to our time, and so on to the end of the world. This is a mediated calling, since it is done by man. Nevertheless it is divine.”

Luther’s doctrine of apostolic succession here should be noted. But the point he makes is a valid one, that the calling of virtually all men is a mediated calling, but Paul’s was not. Calvin made a like comment, saying and I quote: “In the church we ought to listen to God alone, and to Jesus Christ, whom he has appointed to be our teacher. Whoever assumes a right to instruct us, must speak in the name of God or of Christ.” It is interesting that almost the same thing Calvin had to say, Father Rowan the Catholic commentator also said.

Sanday, an episcopal scholar, says of this statement: “Not of men, neither by a man,” that “two distinct prepositions were used: not of” that is, from men, in the sense of the ultimate source from which authority is derived, “Neither by or through men,” with reference to the channel or agency by which it is conveyed.

Paul is emphatic. A major effort was underway to belittle his calling, his teaching, and his person. Now this was both a foolish and a dangerous thing for the Galatians and others to do, because in opposing Paul they were opposing God. If any man wages war against God’s faithful servants, he had better have a confirmed Revelation from God to do so, or clear warrant from the word of God that the man is out of line, because failing that he wages war against God; and from the days of the apostles to the present this is a common occupation.

Paul goes on to say that in verse 2: “And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:” Paul is writing this letter, it is his letter and his alone; but he includes in his salutation ‘all the brethren which are with me.’ Not as joint writers, ‘with me’ in the sense of supporting Paul, in the sense that they feel that Paul must have the support of all Godly men.

Then verses 3-5 is a benediction. “Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father: To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.”

Now this is a very interesting and significant benediction because it is not preceded by any commendation of any of the churches in Galatia. The word ‘benediction’ comes from the Hebrew word meaning to ‘fall on ones knees.’ Judaism from ancient times began benedictions with the words: “Bless art Thou oh Lord God.” and if the benediction were a part of a prayer, the words: “Our God, king of the Universe.” Were added. According to Rabbinic scholars there were two laws of benediction. First, every benediction must have the name of God in it, and second every benediction must acknowledge God’s kingship. But there was more. The benediction to be received requires us, as the very Hebrew word indicates, to fall on our knees in the sense of acknowledging God’s sovereignty, His kingship, and receiving and obeying His law word, the covenant word. If not, the benediction becomes a curse.

Paul, hoping to recall the churches of Galatia to Christ, pronounces a benediction upon them without praising them for anything, so that in effect he says: ‘either turn to this Christ, or you will be under His curse.’ He declares herein that redemption is all of grace, ordained by the Father and executed by the Son. Hence to Him be glory forever and ever, amen.

Now, Paul in this benediction says that Jesus Christ gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil world. This is a very interesting expression, the word ‘evil’ in Greek has more than one form, a very common word used generally to cover anything that is bad is (Kokos?) a word that has passed into a great many languages, and is very commonly used by mothers in many, many Indo-European languages as a word for feces when they are talking to their children.

The other word, the word that Paul here uses is ‘Poneros’. We have a form of that word in English: “Pernicious.” The word pernicious comes from poneros. Satan is the poneros, the pernicious one, the one who seeks to corrupt and drag down all others with himself. And Paul describes the world as evil in this sense. It seeks to drag down all men and the Christian church together with itself, and only the atonement can rescue us from this evil world.

Thus Poneros carries the note not merely of evil, but of malignancy. Paul here gives us a summary statement of Christ’s atonement and resurrection, after which came the ascension, which Simian commented on saying: “Christ took upon Him the government of the world. This is the end He ever keeps in view, in the chastisements He inflicts and in the blessings He bestows.”

And Paul’s point is that because Christ is now king, this world is unleashing malignancy against the people of God, and this malignancy, it seeks to infiltrate into the churches, and to turn men within the church against Christ, and against His word, and against His people.

Paul is not gentle in this letter on the Galatians. He makes clear that he believes they are becoming a part of this evil world, a part of this malignancy. Why then, given the evils of these Galatian groups, does Paul call them churches? Many assemblies far gone in the New Testament are still called churches. In fact, when our Lord in Revelations 2:9 and 3:9 refers to some as synagogues or assemblies of Satan, because the word assemblies or synagogue was the term for the churches in the first century, he may have been referring in part to such churches.

When Paul calls any group a church, or when any group calls itself a church, by that name it opens itself to special blessings, and special curses. Because as Peter tells us in 1 Peter 4:17 “Judgement must begin at the house of God.” The greater the responsibility, the greater the culpability.

We find this also, this kind of situation in the Old Testament. In Jeremiah 7:8-16 we have an important statement in terms of this concept, text. Jeremiah said of the people of Judah whom he described as Antinomian to the core, lawless to the core, that they said in effect: “We are delivered to do all these abominations.” Those are Jeremiahs words. “We are delivered, we have been saved, to do all these abominations. We have been saved by grace, so now we are free to do as we please.” Jeremiah well described the antinomians we see around us today, centuries ago.

Simian in his commentary on Galatians, citing not only a number of statements by Paul but also Jeremiah, said and I quote: “The truth is that Christians in general differ very little from either Jews or heathens.” He was writing this about two hundred years ago. “Christianity occupies their heads, but heathenism their hearts. They pretend to have faith, but for as the faith that overcomes the world, they know nothing about it. Their whole life, instead of being occupied in a progressive transformation of the soul after the divine image, is one continued state of conformity to the world, and instead of regarding the friendship of the world as a decisive proof of their enmity against God, they affect it, they seek it, they glory in it.”

The Galatians were malignant churches and peoples. This is why this letter is so important as we face the church scene today. The Galatians that attacked Paul, and had challenged and denied his credentials, Paul does not compromise. Nor does he assume that sweetness and honeyed words are the answer. He attacks them unsparingly in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Let us pray.

Oh Lord our God, Thy word is truth, and Thy word concerning the Galatians through Paul is Thy word to all churches today, whatever label they bear, that are faithless to Thee and to Thy word. Give us grace our Father, to stand clearly and unequivocally in terms of Thy calling and Thy word, Thy covenant. Make us more than conquerors as we face these malignant churches and churchmen, that we might indeed triumph, that we might see Thy justice prevail, that we might see the world under Thy grace and mercy, the peoples as Thy people, the earth as Thy kingdom in truth and righteousness. Grant us this we beseech Thee, in our saviors name, amen.

Are there any questions now? Paul’s letters are sometimes very emotional things. Corinthians and Galatians are two signal examples of this, and they are marked by some very plain speaking. Well, if there are no questions… yes John?

[John] There is a, I had a long conversation with a friend of mine, who I guess through my efforts is only recently come across to the Chalcedon perspective in the last two months, and the Reconstructionist view is kind of consuming, he is devouring everything; but one of the problems that he has been having in talking to friends …?... have now, they suspect of him being involved in a cult, and various other kinds of things.

One of the problems he has been having though is pointing out to these people that it is not by his authority but by God’s authority that the word of God is true, and certain things are binding upon man such as the law and what have you, etc. And he is having a major problem trying to get people to understand that it isn’t his thinking or Rushdoony’s thinking, it is the word of God and His authority which is binding on Christians, and not the thinking of men. And I am wondering, isn’t there some connection here between the approach that Paul is taking, and a solution to that kind of problem, because it is a problem that I have come against several times myself. You know, you sit down, you go through this long exhaustive treatment with people about what one should and shouldn’t do as a Christian, and when it is all over they say: “Well, yeah, that’s find John, but that’s your opinion.”

And the question is, how do you bring the authority of the word to bear upon people, so that they understand that it really has nothing to do with my personal opinion, that it is a matter of God’s law, God’s law word that He is teaching in scripture?

[Rushdoony] First of all, you do not argue with them.

[Audience Member] No, that’s definite…

[Rushdoony] When you are arguing with them, you are saying they have a reasonable position, and therefore it is a matter of reasoning. You simply declare the word of God, and then if the Holy Spirit chooses not to work in their hearts, that is it. But they are going to answer to God, so that is their responsibility, and Ezekiel made it clear that God required him to make a witness once to someone, and then he was innocent of their blood. We are not called to be naggers, and a great deal of personal evangelism has become nagging.

[Audience Member] That is essentially what I told him, and I said one of the great benefits that I have gotten out of Van Til’s teaching was the fact that you don’t try to reason with people who are of an opposite (belief?) and he immediately asked me to quote page and chapter and verse where Van Til said that, because they have never heard of Van Til, and he wanted to read it; and I couldn’t, and I said ‘you’ll have to wait until I get finished with some stuff that I am doing now;’ but that is essentially the same answer I gave him.

[Rushdoony] Yes. That is all you can say. Yes?

[Audience Member] Is it correct to assume that because a church calls itself a church, even though it teaches and believes nothing, is in fact the property of Jesus Christ?

[Rushdoony] If it calls itself a church it is God’s property, it is Christ’s property, and He is going to deal with them.

[Audience Member] Is it then justifiable for a small group of Christians to go in to such a church, perhaps an old church with very few members, with the intension of controlling it and taking it over? Many of these old churches with nice facilities, particularly (?) churches, (?).

[Rushdoony] Well, the opposition has done that regularly. They have taken over churches with huge, endowed assets, any church with big endowments is a push over, it has been taken over, almost all of them. If there is a small congregation with no denominational ties that may be twenty, thirty members, I see no reason why, since it belongs to Jesus Christ, to reclaim that property for Him.

[Audience Member] …?...

[Rushdoony] Have what?

[Audience Member] Do churches such as that that do have denominational ties have methods of fighting that?

[Rushdoony] No, because according to the Supreme Court in the Civil war era, when in order to take over the properties of churches in the border states, they ruled that they belonged to the denomination, and so the Northern churches beginning with the Presbyterian took over the churches, nailed the doors shut, and allowed no one to meet, because the clergy were uniformly pro-Southern, or else, did not want to get involved either side, they felt they should simply preach the gospel. Since then, the courts have almost always ruled that a church which is a denominational church belongs to the denomination. Very briefly, through a freakish decision, the door was opened for the formation of the Presbyterian Church of America, PCA. But that door has since been closed, they were able to go out with their properties. But if you try to take over something that belongs to a denomination, the denomination can come in and shut the church, and sell the property; or declare that you are not a church and evict every one of you.

[Audience Member] Well was that a part of the contract before you become a member of that denomination?

[Rushdoony] According to the Supreme Court, a local church belongs to the Conference, Presbytery, or Diocese of that particular church. Very few people are aware that that is the case, but it is the law. Any other questions or comments?

Well, let us bow our heads now in prayer. Oh Lord our God, we thank Thee that the world is not governed by the malignancy of men, but by Thy purpose and Thy will, and in this confidence we come to Thee, to cast our every care upon Thee who carest for us. We cast our personal cares, our vocational, our national, our world cares, knowing oh Lord that Thou art able, and that Thy word is truth.

And now go in peace.