Lesson 6 - Confronting the Galatians
8. When Paul travelled through the region of Galatia preaching the gospel of Christ, what do you think he used as his source material?
At this point in history, the only “references” Paul could point to would be the Old Testament. Of course, as an Apostle, he had received direct revelation from God, hearing directly from the Lord Jesus (Acts 9 for example). However, we see in Acts 17:2 that Paul’s custom was to reason (speak, teach, argue from) the Scriptures. And, at that time, the only Scripture available would have been the Old Testament.
12. If “those who are of faith are the sons of Abraham” (emphasis added), is there some sense in which those without faith, regardless of their genetic connection to him, aren’t his sons? Is this the point Paul’s making in Romans 9:6–8? Read that passage and discuss.
There are two different senses in which the Bible uses the phrase “sons of Abraham.” One sense is strictly literal and speaks of the physical, genetic descendants of Abraham. This sense is usually further qualified by being descendants of Abrham, Isaac, and Jacob — which specifies ethnic Israelites from others who also descended from Abraham (e.g., Ishmael and his ancestors). In this sense, you can be a “son of Abraham” genetically without having faith in God’s promises.
The second sense of this same phrase is very different. It can apply to either a Jew or a Gentile. It is based solely on having faith in the promise God made to Abraham and fulfilled in Jesus Christ. In Galatians 3:7, Paul is using this second sense to apply this promise to both believing Jew and believing Gentile (see, e.g., Galatians 3:8-9). In Romans 9:6-8, Paul is seemingly making the same point from the opposite direction. In Romans 9:8, Paul is arguing that it is more important to be a “child of Abraham” in the second sense (a child of promise) than it is to be a “child of Abraham” in the first sense (a child of the flesh).
Going Deeper
1. Are Paul and James preaching conflicting gospels? Why or why not?
No, Paul and James are not arguing for different gospels. In essence, Paul wants his readers to understand that they are saved by grace through faith. James writes to impress upon his readers that empty faith – faith that doesn’t respond to God properly – is exactly that: empty. Useless. Vain.
Instead of seeing these messages as contradictions, we need to understand them as two sides of the same coin. They complement and complete each other. A true, genuine, saving faith will produce fruit. In other words, we are saved by faith alone, and the evidence that our salvation is genuine will be proven by a change of works. Works do not produce salvation, but genuine faith that results in salvation does produce good works. On this, both Paul and James are in complete agreement.