Paul has been defending the truth of Jesus’ message of love and forgiveness for the last four chapters. Now, he shows the practical implications of how this message can change our lives—how it can change your life. Some commentators argue that the transformation of believers is “the most powerful argument of all.”[114] This seems overstated, but there is much truth in this statement. After all, Paul’s opponents—the Judaizers—were arguing that the freedom of grace would lead to sinful living. But instead, Paul shows that this newfound freedom actually leads to deep, spiritual transformation.
Modern people carry many strong opinions about freedom. In fact, this is one of the virtues of Western culture on which just about everyone can agree. We never see people with picket signs that say, “DOWN WITH FREEDOM!” or “PLEASE CONTROL ME!” Hardly! Modern people hold freedom as a central value—yet they often find the subject hard to define. Indeed, freedom isn’t as two-dimensional as our culture would have us believe. More freedom does not necessarily result in more happiness.
Some freedoms are devastating. For instance, I wouldn’t give a child a circular saw for Christmas or throwing knives for his birthday. Oscar Wilde wrote, “When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.’”[115]
Some voluntary restraints are liberating. My friend rode the “Raptor” at Cedar Point amusement park. But his harness broke as the ride took off. He needed to hold onto the seat for dear life as the ride flew through the air. Needless to say, that restraint would’ve been welcomed by him. With the restraint in place, he would’ve been able to enjoy himself on the ride, rather than fearing for life. Here’s the point: More freedom does not equal more happiness. We need voluntary limits to our freedom to have maximal well-being.
Our freedoms often conflict with each other. If we exercise the freedom to binge on TV shows late into the night, then we sacrifice the freedom of a good night’s sleep and a pleasurable workday. If we work 100 hours a week to advance our career, we will lose the freedom to develop quality relationships. If we demand the freedom to eat whatever we want, we lose a higher quality of life. When put to a decision, we often hear people say, “Well, then I just want to choose both!” But as we can see, sometimes, we are forced to choose, and we need to choose wisely.
Consider one more example: If we want the intimacy, love, and security of a relationship, we necessarily need to forfeit certain freedoms.
Imagine dating a girl and telling her, “I’d love for you to meet my five other girlfriends… They’re great!”
Imagine telling your fiancé, “I want to travel wherever I want, whenever I want, with whomever I want.”
Imagine a parent wanting kids, but not wanting to spend any time with them. For many of us, we grew up in homes exactly like this. Of course, we don’t need to argue the devastating results that follow.
We can have autonomous freedom, or we can have the intimacy of relationship. But we can’t have both. At the very least, there is tension between these two extremes. This leads us to the Bible’s teaching regarding freedom—which is surprisingly nuanced and accurate to the human experience. According to the Bible, we will all serve someone or something. The ultimate balance of freedom and restraint is found in following Christ. George writes, “Outside of Jesus Christ, human existence is characterized as bondage—bondage to the law, bondage to the evil elements dominating the world, bondage to sin, the flesh, and the devil. God sent his Son into the world to shatter the dominion of these slaveholders.”[116] The freedom Christ gives us is the freedom to enjoy love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, etc. (Gal. 5:22-23) If we had more love and joy in our lives, we would truly be more free.
(5:1) “It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.”
“It was for freedom that Christ set us free.” Elsewhere, Paul wrote, “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom” (2 Cor. 3:17 NIV). In context, Paul is referring to freedom from the Law. This is an indicative—what Jesus has already done for us. That is, Jesus set us free from the Law. But what is our role in pursuing freedom?
“Therefore keep standing firm.” Here is the imperative: We need to keep our firm footing on the foundation of God’s grace, rather than falling back under law.
“Do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.” The “yoke” was a term that was frequently used to describe taking on the OT law (Acts 15:10). Perhaps Peter read this letter and cited Paul in Acts 15:10. By contrast to this “yoke” of the law, Jesus offers a wonderful alternative. He said, “Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For My yoke is easy and My burden is light” (Mt. 11:29-30).
(5:2) “Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.”
The expression “receive circumcision” is in the passive, present tense (“If you should let yourselves be circumcised”[117]). In other words, the Galatians were in the midst of considering circumcision, and Paul is trying to stop this from happening.
(5:3) “And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law.”
Law and grace are mutually exclusive. You can’t just follow a little bit of Law. If you’re going to take the path of the Law, then you need to take the whole Law. Paul mentions circumcision here, but he also alludes to holy days (4:10), as well as food laws (2:12).
(5:4) “You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.”
Some decisions in life are nuanced and complicated. But not this one. This is one or the other. We either grow with God through Christ, or we fail to grow because of falling under the Law (cf. Gal. 3:13).
(Gal. 5:4) Does this passage teach that Christians can lose their salvation?
Paul uses strong language regarding circumcision. When he writes that Christ will be of “no benefit to you” (ophelēsei), this is a play on words with verse 3, where the circumcised man “is under obligation [opheiletēs] to keep the whole Law” (v.3). Cole loosely captures this play on words by writing, “So far from Christ helping you, you yourself will be helpless in law’s clutches.”[118] Later, he states that this results in being “severed from Christ.” That is, the power for spiritual growth is unplugged when we fall under the law. Why is Paul so serious about this?
Paul doesn’t care about the medical procedure of circumcision. Paul himself was circumcised (Phil. 3:5), and he circumcised others in order to avoid offending people (Acts 16:3). Indeed, in this context, he writes, “In Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love” (Gal. 5:6). Elsewhere, he states that circumcised people should not try to become “uncircumcised” (1 Cor. 7:18; cf. 1 Macc. 1:15). Paul isn’t concerned about circumcision as a medical procedure. Instead, he is against the “theology of circumcision.”[119]
Circumcision was a religious commitment to follow the entire law. Truly the act of circumcision was a serious statement and a heavy commitment. You didn’t just accidentally get circumcised. No grown man (in his right mind) would do this unless he had good reason. This was especially true in ancient times, where the anesthetic was a gulp of wine and the surgical device was a flint rock. Indeed, this is delicate surgery!
In this culture, a person would only engage in circumcision to show their commitment to taking on the “whole Law” as Paul puts it (v.3). Indeed, if you require circumcision for spiritual growth, by this same logic you should require the rest of the Law (cf. Gal. 6:12-16). (After all, if you’re willing to go as far as circumcision, what would you refuse to do?)
Yet, all along, Paul has been arguing that law doesn’t lead to growth, but to a curse. Earlier, he argued, “For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them’” (Gal. 3:10). Do you want to “curse” your spiritual growth? Get under the Law! And if you want the Law, then you can’t just stop with circumcision, you need to take on the “whole law” (v.3).
(5:5) “For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness.”
Theologians debate what Paul means by “waiting for the hope of righteousness.” Since our justification is in the past (v.4), it’s likely that Paul means that we are “waiting” for our glorification in the future (Rom. 5:9; 10:9-10). In other words, our past justification gives us hope and anticipation for our future glorification.[120] These believers were tempted to gain justification through the law—even though they already were justified (v.4). Paul corrects them in saying that we should only seek for our future, assured glorification—not our past, secured justification.
Instead of working, Paul is waiting. This could be an allusion back to the story of Abraham waiting for Isaac in the last chapter. Rather than working to make things happen with Ishmael through Hagar, Abraham learned to wait on God’s future promise. The same is true for the new covenant believer.
(5:6) “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love.”
Paul isn’t against circumcision. Paul isn’t anti-circumcision or anti-Jewish (after all, he was both circumcised and Jewish!). To Paul, the purpose of following God is love—not Law (Gal. 5:14; cf. Rom. 13:10; Gal. 6:15).
Paul isn’t against good works. He believes in “faith working [energoumenē] through love.” Roman Catholic theologians grammatically interpret this in the passive voice, which would translate in this way: “Faith is being created from love.” In this view, we love in order to produce faith. Not true. Grammatically, we can also understand this in the middle voice, which would translate in this way: “Faith is being expressed through love.” The middle voice makes more sense of the passage for several reasons: First, throughout his letter, Paul has been arguing about the logical priority of faith before any sort of good works. Second, in Paul’s writing, faith is typically the root and love is the fruit (Eph. 1:15; Col. 1:4; 1 Cor. 13:13; cf. 1 Thess. 1:3). Third, this reading fits with the rest of the NT teaching that we can recognize someone’s faith through their love (Jas. 2:14-26).[121] In other words, Paul is simply saying that “that the faith which justifies is of such a nature that it will express itself through love.”[122]
Paul is for faith being expressed in love. This is the theme of this chapter (Gal. 5:13, 14, 22). The question is simply this: How can a person be transformed into a loving person—through Law or through faith?
(5:7) “You were running well; who hindered you from obeying the truth?”
“You were running well.” Paul often compared the Christian life to an athletic race (Gal. 2:2; 1 Cor. 9:24-27; Phil. 3:13, 14; 2 Tim. 4:7). These believers started off well, but they slowed down over time because of legalistic teaching. Paul used this metaphor of “running” to refer to his own ministry in Galatians 2:2 (“for fear that I had been running, or had run, in vain”).
“Who hindered you from obeying the truth?” False teachers were certainly present in this church. Paul uses the singular to refer to a specific person (“who”), and later in verse 10, he refers to “the one” (singular) who is leading believers astray. It seems that there was a single ringleader who was promoting this heresy in Galatia (cf. comments on 3:1)
“Hindered” (enkoptō) was a military term that referred to “setting up an obstacle or breaking up a road.”[123] It’s the same root word for “mutilate” (apokoptō) mentioned later (Gal. 5:12). This makes sense as to why Paul uses such strong language for the false teachers in Galatians 5:12—namely, instead of “cutting” these believers, the false teachers should “cut” themselves instead.
(5:8) “This persuasion did not come from Him who calls you.”
Whatever “persuasion” the false teachers used, it was not based on truth (v.7), and it did not come from God (v.8). Paul has spent four chapters arguing precisely this, and now he states it plainly. To paraphrase, “These teachers are not on God’s side.” False teachers seem persuasive to young believers, but Paul expects even young Christians to withstand false teaching (v.10).
(5:9) “A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough.”
The “leaven” is the persuasion of the false teachers (cf. Lk. 12:1; Mt. 16:6, 11). These believers were considering a “little law” (circumcision) in their spiritual diet. Paul writes that this is like a “little leaven” that gets into a lump of dough: It won’t stop until it spread throughout the entire loaf of bread. This is similar to adding just a little bit of cyanide to a glass of water: It poisons the entire glass.
Interestingly, Paul uses the same metaphor of “a little leaven” for both legalism (Gal. 5:9) and licentiousness (1 Cor. 5:6). Both have a treacherous and permeating effect on Christian community.
(5:10) “I have confidence in you in the Lord that you will adopt no other view; but the one who is disturbing you will bear his judgment, whoever he is.”
How does Paul have such confidence in them? He must be trusting that the truth will have a resonating effect in their lives. By contrast, Paul considers this false teacher (or teachers) to be a non-Christian, under the anathema of God (Gal. 1:8), who will “bear his judgment.”
(5:11) “But I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted? Then the stumbling block of the cross has been abolished.”
The false teachers taught circumcision so that they would avoid persecution (Gal. 6:12), but not Paul. He was willing to suffer in order to keep the message pure and clear.
Paul isn’t claiming that he preached circumcision. He seems to be separating himself from the false teachers who were teaching circumcision. Since he’s getting persecuted, it shows that he’s not preaching circumcision. Jewish preachers were not under persecution at this time from the Romans or from the Christians. The only ones who were persecuted for their preaching were Christian believers, because they were preaching a “stumbling block” (i.e. skandalon, or the “scandal of the Cross”).
How does preaching circumcision take away the scandal of the Cross? The shocking claim of Jesus’ message is that we do nothing to earn a relationship with God. Boice writes, “All these things—feasts, circumcision, ceremonies, legal observances, or anything symbolizing external religion today—are of man and are part of a system that seeks to attain standing before God through merit.”[124]
(5:12) “I wish that those who are troubling you would even mutilate themselves.”
Commentators have called this statement “startling,”[125] “disgusting,”[126] and the “crudest and rudest”[127] of all of Paul’s statements. The term “mutilate” (apokoptō) comes from the two words apo (“away from”) and koptō (“to cut”). This latter word is used throughout the rest of the Bible to refer to cutting off a limb (Mk. 9:43, 45), cutting off an ear (Jn. 18:10), or cutting ropes (Acts 27:32). In this context, Paul is referring to circumcision, so he is no doubt referring to cutting off the male genitalia.
This could be an allusion to the OT where we read, “No one who is emasculated or has his male organ cut off shall enter the assembly of the LORD” (Deut. 23:1). Paul is saying that these people should be “excluded from Christ, placed under a curse, and anathematized.”[128] In other words, this is a graphic way of explaining the anathema of Galatians 1:6-9.
Earlier, Paul asked, “Who hindered you…?” (Gal. 5:7). The word “hindered” (enkoptō) comes from the same root word that means “to cut” (Gal. 5:12). This makes sense as to why Paul uses such strong language for the false teachers in Galatians 5:12. That is, instead of “cutting” these believers, the false teachers should “cut” themselves!
Paul isn’t being vindictive or malicious. Surely, he’s using rhetoric. After all, in Paul’s own life, he rejoiced and showed forgiveness when people harmed, attacked, or falsely imprisoned him (e.g. Acts 16:23-31; 2 Tim. 4:16). In this case, Paul is sticking up for these vulnerable Christians. Indeed, Paul himself wasn’t wronged by these false teachers, and in fact, it’s clear he’d never even met them. Instead, he is standing up for these young Christians who are being bullied by these false teachers. We shouldn’t call this malicious, but courageous. Paul is taking a similar view to Jesus, who said that false teachers would be lucky to have a millstone tied around their necks (Lk. 17:2; Mt. 18:6).
(5:13a) “For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh.”
It must be possible to abuse grace. Otherwise, Paul never would’ve cautioned against this. But what is the solution? Fear? Threats? Law? No, the solution to avoid sin is not less grace, but more. After understanding the grace of God, why would we want to sin more? What about the unconditional love of God would make us want to sin more.
We are free to sin, but we are not free to stop sinning. Jesus said, “Everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin” (Jn. 8:34). Sin has an addictive effect on the human heart. As Paul argues in Romans 6, a lifestyle of sin is inconsistent with our new identity in Christ (cf. Gal. 5:13 below).
Understanding the grace of God doesn’t encourage more sin. What about this message of incredible love and forgiveness would cause people to want to kill and harm others? People who use grace as a license for sin simply haven’t understood it or experienced it.
The Holy Spirit begins to work within us. Paul writes, “The love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us” (Rom. 5:5). Those who know Christ also know the love of God through the Holy Spirit. When believers fall into sin, this grieves the Holy Spirit (Eph. 4:30). As a result, sin isn’t as exciting as it used to be.
Christians still live with the consequences of sin. Being a Christian doesn’t stop a person from going to prison, experiencing destructive relationships, enslaving addictions, or any other consequences.
All Christians agree that God’s grace covers sin on a deathbed conversion (Lk. 23:43). What is the difference between sinning for 80 years and being forgiven at the beginning versus sinning for 80 years and being forgiven at the end? Those who oppose free grace should really question how efficacious they believe the Cross to be. Did Jesus’ death pay for all of our sins or not? (Gal. 2:21)
(5:13b) “But through love serve one another.”
The freedom here is not meant to encourage sinning, but to encourage serving. Earlier, Paul writes, “Do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery (douleias)” (Gal. 5:1). Here, he says we should “serve” (douleuete) one another.
(5:14) “For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’”
Love is the point—not Law (citing Lev. 19:18). If our hearts were changed to actually love others, we wouldn’t need a list of rules to direct us. When we are walking by the Spirit, we carry out the requirements of the Law. Elsewhere, Paul wrote that Jesus died “so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit” (Rom. 8:4; cf. 13:8).
Does this mean that we should love ourselves before loving others? No! I love myself quite a bit. Indeed, I’m an expert at loving myself. In fact, nobody loves me the way that I do! God wants me to learn to love others to this extent. By focusing on others, we get the focus off of ourselves, our performance, and our comparison. God’s alternative to sin is serving.
In the previous section, Paul explained that our ultimate design is not to be controlled by law or licentiousness, but love. But how do we grow into more loving people? Paul argues that we don’t need something to change us, but Someone. It’s true that we do need effort. Our problem, however, is that we often place our effort in the wrong areas (e.g. Law, self-effort, willpower, etc.). In this section, Paul explains how to grow through the power of the Holy Spirit.
(5:15) “But if you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another.”
“Bite and devour one another.” Longenecker writes, “The hyperbole pictures wild beasts fighting so ferociously with one another that they end up annihilating each other.”[129] Communities like this result in mutually assured destruction (Gal. 5:20, 26). Likewise, the word “consumed” (analōthēte) is “used of destruction by fire; the basic idea seems to be that nothing at all remains.”[130]
What is the solution to such horrible in-fighting and division? Paul explains that the engine behind the Christian life is the Holy Spirit.
(5:16) “But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.”
The order of operations is crucial. Which comes first? Do we try to simply stop sinning? Do we exert moral will power? No, this would be reversing Paul’s order. Paul doesn’t write, “Do not carry out the desire of the flesh, and then you will learn to walk by the Spirit.” Instead, according to this passage, we first experience the Holy Spirit in our lives, discover how to “walk” (peripateō) with him,[131] and then experience transformation. This robs the sinful nature of its power.
“Desire” (epithumeō) comes from the two roots “over” (epi) and “desire” (thumia). Thus, this refers to an “over desire.” We could translate this as a “great desire” or an “inordinate” desire (BDAG). Such a strong desire needs a powerful antidote. As we learn, laws and self-effort won’t do the trick. We need nothing less than the power of the Holy Spirit.
(5:17) “For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please.”
Our struggle with sin will be ongoing. There is only victory when we “walk” by the Spirit (v.16), or are “led” by the Spirit (v.18), rather than being focused on the Law. To be clear, the battle is not between my will power and my sinful nature; the battle is between the Holy Spirit and my sinful nature. My role is to actively trust in the Spirit’s power to battle my flesh—not to trust in my will power to battle my flesh.
Our struggle with sin is binary. We will either be conquered by sin or by the Spirit. Fung writes, “In the Spirit-flesh conflict it is impossible for the believer to remain neutral: he either serves the flesh or follows the Spirit.”[132]
Our struggle with sin will be confusing and conflicting. Paul writes, “So that you may not do the things that you please.” How confusing! When I look inside, I discover a fractured self—two desires at war with one another. Because I am a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17), I can look at my old self with disgust. But because I am a polluted sinner, I find myself drawn away from God’s will. The “things that you please” refer to positive, godly desires—not sinful living.[133] Elsewhere, Paul elaborates on this inner conflict: “I don’t really understand myself, for I want to do what is right, but I don’t do it. Instead, I do what I hate. 16 But if I know that what I am doing is wrong, this shows that I agree that the law is good. 17 So I am not the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it. 18 And I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. I want to do what is right, but I can’t. 19 I want to do what is good, but I don’t. I don’t want to do what is wrong, but I do it anyway” (Rom. 7:15-19 NLT).
(5:18) “But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law.”
Our struggle with sin will not be helped by Law. Indeed, this is precisely what will hurt our battle against the sinful nature. This passage is parallel to verse 16. In both verses we “walk” or are “led” by the “Spirit.” This must mean that “not carry[ing] out the desire of the flesh” and “not [being] under Law” are also parallel ideas. Again, Paul’s discourse in Romans 5-8 expands on this theme.
Our struggle with sin will succeed or fail based on our trust in the Holy Spirit’s power. This means that we must “walk” by the Spirit and be “led” by the Spirit.
“Led by the Spirit.” This means that I am handing over the leadership of my life to God, rather than gripping tightly to control. Boice writes, “Being led by the Spirit does not imply passivity but rather the need to allow oneself to be led.”[134] To do this, the believer “must let himself be led by the Spirit—that is, actively choose to stand on the side of the Spirit over against the flesh,” or what has been called a “passive-active action.”[135]
“You are not under the Law.” We would expect Paul to say that “we are not under the flesh.” After all, this is the contrast Paul has been using leading up to verse 18. However, Paul states that being led by the Spirit brings us out from under the law. We agree with Fung, who writes, “According to Paul’s exposition in Romans, the law, far from restraining the flesh, actually produces the opposite effect.”[136] In comparing verse 16 with verse 18, it’s clear that Paul is using the concepts of “flesh” and “law” synonymously.
So far, this all might seem abstract. How do we actually do this day to day—moment to moment?
(Gal. 5:19) “Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, 21 envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.”
“Now the deeds of the flesh are evident.” When Paul writes that the deeds of the flesh are “evident” (phaneros), he doesn’t mean that we can always see these visibly. Instead, he means that it is obvious that “such acts originate with the sinful nature.”[137]
These are “deeds” as opposed to fruit in the next list (vv.22-23). We are able to perform “deeds,” but only God can grow “fruit.” The former is natural, the latter is supernatural.
Immorality (porneia) is the root from which we get our modern term “pornography.” This is selfish sex, where I use other people for pleasure. The popular song says, “I’m in love with your body. I’m in love with the shape of you.”[138] From this perspective, we only love a part of the person—not the entire person.
Impurity (akatharsia) means “any substance that is filthy or dirty, refuse” or “a state of moral corruption” (BDAG).
Sensuality (aselgia) is also translated “depravity” (NET) or “debauchery” (NIV). It means a “lack of self-constraint which involves one in conduct that violates all bounds of what is socially acceptable, self-abandonment” or to “give oneself over to licentiousness” (BDAG).
Idolatry (eidololatria) means to “commit unlawful deeds connected with polytheistic worship” (BDAG).
Sorcery (pharmakeia) is a complex term. The word “originally meant the medical use of drugs; but it came to mean the abuse of drugs for poisoning instead of healing, finally taking on the sense of ‘witchcraft’ or ‘sorcery.’”[139] Colin Brown notes, “The dividing line between magic and religion is often indistinct. Sir James Frazer suggested that religion was characterized by conciliation of superhuman powers, whereas magic is concerned with the control by man of the forces of nature.”[140]
Enmities (echthra) refers to hatred or hostility. It can be understood as having hostility toward God (Jas. 4:4) or toward people (Lk. 23:12). Since it occurs in the context of both false religion and interpersonal conflict, the usage is not clear. Both types of hostility could be in view—namely, we could hate God and hate his people.
Strife (eris) literally refers to “rivalry” or being “quarrelsome.” This is defined as “engagement in rivalry, especially with reference to positions taken in a matter, strife, discord, contention” (BDAG).
Jealousy (zelos) can be positive or negative. It can refer to “intense positive interest in something… zeal, ardor, marked by a sense of dedication” (BDAG). Or it can refer to “intense negative feelings over another’s achievements or success, jealousy, envy.” (BDAG). So, it can be used to describe our zeal for God (Rom. 10:2; Phil. 3:6), or it can refer to envying the belongings of another person (Jas. 3:14; e.g. gifts, good looks, finances, blessings?).
Outbursts of anger (thymoi) refers to anger that is “more passionate” and “more temporary.”[141] It can be defined as an “intense expression of the inner self, frequently expressed as strong desire, passion, passionate longing” (BDAG). This is the same word used of God’s anger (Rev. 16:19; 19:15). Yet God’s anger is a controlled anger based on his flawless moral nature—much unlike our typical experience and expression of anger.
Disputes (eritheiai) was used before the NT to refer to “a self-seeking pursuit of political office by unfair means” (BDAG). It comes from the root word for a “hired hand” (erithos), who would only work for pay. It later referred to “canvassing for office” or “competing” with others (2 Cor. 12:20; Phil. 1:17; 2:3).[142]
Dissensions (dichostasiai) means to create factions. This would include pitting people against each other. This is “objective disunity,” even in a “political” sense where we form ranks along party lines.[143]
Factions (haireseis) means “a group that holds tenets distinctive to it, sect, party, school, faction” (BDAG). In later history, it was used of a “heretical” sect. This comes from the verbal root “to choose” (haireisthai).
Envying (phothonoi) is similar to jealousy above, but is always used in a negative sense.[144]
Drunkenness (methai) means “‘unrestrained revelry’ [that] may influence methai in the direction of [a] drinking-bout” (BDAG). When we’re living for self, we can’t tolerate it for long, and we can’t do it sober for long.
Carousing (komoi) originally had a good connotation of having a celebratory feast together. Later, it was used “in a bad sense [of] excessive feasting” (BDAG). It’s primary reference was to “the drunken orgies encouraged at festivals of the pagan gods,” and its secondary usage referred to the “general insobriety of pagan life.”[145]
“Things like these.” This list is “representative and not exhaustive.”[146]
“Those who practice such things.” This word for “practice” (prassontes) is a present, active participle. This means that this is an ongoing lifestyle.
(Gal. 5:21) Will sinners not “inherit the kingdom of God”?
(Gal. 5:22-23) “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.”
The Greco-Roman world used these same terms, but with a distinct difference. Greek thinkers used these terms with regard to personal “character formation,” while Paul always used them in the context of “brotherly communion” and the “upbuilding of the church.”[147]
“But the fruit of the Spirit is love.” The term “fruit” is in the singular in Greek. This means the fruit of the Spirit is one virtue: love. The rest of these qualities unpack what it means to be a loving person, who is being transformed by God. This isn’t a list of rules. Instead, it’s a picture of a transformed person. It’s as if God is holding up a portrait of a Christ-like person, and giving us a vision of what we can become. Who wouldn’t want more of these qualities in their life?
Love (agapē) is at the core of Christianity, and it shouldn’t surprise us to see it at the beginning and the foundation of Paul’s list. It is the “greatest” of all qualities (1 Cor. 13:13), and it is the very heart of God (1 Jn. 4:8). Even our gifts are subservient to love. The Galatians knew all about spiritual gifts (Gal. 3:5), yet Paul doesn’t even mention gifts here.
Joy (chara) means “the experience of gladness” (BDAG). While the feeling of “joy” is fleeting, we can always choose to rejoice (Phil. 4:4; Acts 16:25), even during times of “sorrow” (2 Cor. 6:10; cf. Heb. 10:34). This occurs through believing the promises of God (Rom. 15:13). This is independent of circumstances. Paul says he had this “joy” even in the midst of others competing with him in ministry (Phil. 1:17-18). This is because Jesus himself wants to give us his joy (Jn. 15:11).
Peace (eirene) refers to a “state of concord, peace, harmony” (BDAG). In the OT, this is the word translated into Greek from the Hebrew word shalom.[148] It could be the inner peace given to us by Christ (Rom. 15:13; Phil. 4:6-7; Jn. 14:27; 16:33), or the peace we can have between believers (Rom. 14:19; Eph. 4:3; 1 Pet. 3:11; Mt. 5:9).[149]
Patience (makrothymia) can be defined as the “state of remaining tranquil while awaiting an outcome, patience, steadfastness, endurance” (BDAG). It is “the ability to put up with other people even when that is not an easy thing to do.”[150] It can also refer to the patience needed while preparing for battle. Brown writes, “Being strictly military terms, the various words are readily used as metaphors in connection with the battles of life.”[151] This is the ability to wait on God before the battle and not hit the panic button, and waiting on God “in season or out of season” (2 Tim. 4:2).
Kindness (crestotes) refers to “uprightness in one’s relations with others, uprightness” or “the quality of being helpful or beneficial, goodness, kindness, generosity” (BDAG). Brown defines this as “a friendly nature.”[152] Jesus was strong and fierce, but when kids saw him, they wanted to crawl all over him like a jungle gym! He had a certain affect that would draw people to him.
Goodness (agathosyne) can be defined as “moral goodness in relation to God who is perfect.”[153] It is paired with “righteousness” (Eph. 5:9), though it likely exceeds merely doing what is right (Rom. 5:7). This would refer to standing up for what’s right without being self-righteous. Can people really predict what my advice will be in advance? Or am I easily manipulated?
Faithfulness (pistis) refers to either placing trust in God or being trustworthy with what we’ve been given (Lk. 16:10-12; 1 Tim 1:12; 3:11; 2 Tim 2:2).
Gentleness (praytes) refers to humility or “the quality of not being overly impressed by a sense of one’s self-importance” (BDAG). It can also refer to the concept of self-restraint. Fung writes, “In classical Greek [this word group was] typically used to describe a person in whom strength and gentleness go together.”[154] Brown writes, “Words from the praÿs group are used of… [tamed] animals.”[155] It refers to “strength under control.”[156] This quality was found in Jesus—thus, it cannot refer to weakness. Boice writes, “Gentleness (prautēs) describes the person who is so much in control of himself that he is always angry at the right time and never angry at the wrong time.”[157] John Stott writes, “The word was also used of domesticated animals. So ‘meekness’ is not a synonym for ‘weakness’. On the contrary, it is the gentleness of the strong, whose strength is under control. It is the quality of a strong personality who is nevertheless master of himself and the servant of others.”[158]
We see this in Paul who writes, “Shall I come to you with a rod, or with love and a spirit of gentleness?” (1 Cor. 4:21). Paul could’ve brought strength and power, but he chose to restrain himself. This is the way in which we are supposed to restore believers caught in sin (Gal. 6:1).
Self-control (egkrateia) can be defined as “restraint of one’s emotions, impulses, or desires” (BDAG). Paul believed this quality related to our spiritual rewards and generally not being disqualified (1 Cor. 9:25). This word group is used in the context of “sexual connotations” more than any other.[159]
“Against such things there is no law.” When we’re in the Spirit and have this inner change of heart, why do we need laws? Laws can change certain outward behaviors, but cannot change us into people of this caliber and character. We naturally fulfill the Law when we are walking in the Spirit (Rom. 8:4).
(5:24) “Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.”
Earlier Paul wrote, “I have been crucified with Christ; and 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 up for me” (Gal. 2:20; cf. Rom. 6:6). Here, however, Paul uses the active voice. This concept refers to what “the believer has himself done and must continue to regard as being done.”[160] This fits with the context of continually walking by the Spirit (v.16, 18, 25).
The key to gaining victory over the “deeds of the flesh” is to realize that our old self (“the flesh”) has been crucified. That person we hate, that we’re frustrated with, that constantly disappoints us: he’s dead! God didn’t renovate or change us. Instead, he killed us at the Cross. He started over with a “new creation” (2 Cor. 5:17).
(5:25) “If we live by the Spirit [position], let us also walk by the Spirit [condition].”
Paul uses the first-class condition to describe our position. This could be rendered, “If—and I’m assuming for the sake of argument that this is true—we live by the Spirit…” A simpler way to translate this would be, “Since we live by the Spirit…” Now that we’re a new creation, we are to believe in that new identity and walk in it.
(5:26) “Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another.”
Instead of getting the focus on others in competition, we are supposed to get the focus onto Christ in sanctification. Stott writes, “This is a very instructive verse because it shows that our conduct to others is determined by our opinion of ourselves.”[161]
(1) Read verse 1-15. In this section, what does Paul mean by the word “free” or “freedom”? How is his definition similar or different to the definition of “freedom” in our modern culture?
(2) Read verses 16-21. Think through the negative qualities that Paul lists. Focus on a few that have special relevance for your life or for your small group. Explain what relative victory would look like in each of these areas. Also explain how we can practically pursue victory in each area.
Do you think it is sin-focused to read books and materials on specific sin issues that we struggle with (v.16)? At what point does it become a sin-focus to do this?
(3) Read verses 16-18. What does it practically look like to “walk by the Spirit” or to “be led by the Spirit”?
(4) Read verse 22. Why does Paul use the metaphor of “fruit” to describe spiritual growth?
Rhetorical questions for reflection: Is “love” one of the most distinguishing features of my influence of others? Do the people that I lead and influence consider me their friend?
James is an elder at Dwell Community Church, where he teaches classes in theology, apologetics, and weekly Bible studies.
