Galatians 2:17-19

Galatians 2:17-19; Galatians 2:17-19 furnish an example of the condensed and nervous dialectics of Paul, similar to Romans 3:3-8. The sense is somewhat obscured by brevity, and has been differently explained. Some make Paul reason from false premises of the Judaizers, by drawing from them a logical inference which they themselves must repel with pious horror. But he rather draws, in the form of a question, a false conclusion of the Judaizing opponents from correct premises of his own, and rejects their conclusion with his usual formula of abhorrence; just as in Romans 6:2 he repels a false antinomian inference from his correct doctrine of justification by faith: ‘Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid ！ ' His argument is this: But (you may object) if by seeking gratuitous justification in Christ we had to abandon legal justification and sink to the level of common ‘sinners' (that is, take our position with the profane heathen who know not the law, and can only be justified by faith), does it not follow then (ᾶ ρα) that Christ instead of aboli shing sin, promotes sin? Away with this monstrous and blasphemous thought! On the contrary, there is sin in returning to the law after having abandoned it for faith in Christ (as Peter did). I myself (Paul now politely chooses the first person, but means Peter) stand convicted of transgression if I build up again (as thou doest now at Antioch) the very law of Moses which I pulled down (as thou didst at Cæsarea by divine command, and at first in Antioch), and thus condemn my own former conduct. For the law itself taught me to exchange it for Christ to whom it points and leads as a schoolmaster. It would be sin therefore to return to it for justification.