Galatians 2:17

But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.

Cross-reference

In Galatians 3:21, Paul again asks a rhetorical question and answers with 'Certainly not!' regarding law vs. promises, continuing the same logical pattern.

Matthew 1:21 reveals Christ's purpose: to save from sins, directly contradicting the idea that He could be a minister of sin.

Romans 3:4 Parallel

Romans 3:4 uses the same emphatic 'By no means!' and affirms God's truthfulness, mirroring Paul's rejection of the false conclusion here.

Romans 3:6 Parallel

Romans 3:6 also begins with 'By no means!' and argues from God's role as judge, reinforcing Paul's rhetorical method of dismissing wrong inferences.

Romans 6:1 Parallel

In Romans 6:1, Paul raises the same objection—'Shall we go on sinning that grace may increase?'—directly paralleling the question in Gal 2:17.

Romans 6:2 Parallel

In Romans 6:2, Paul rejects the objection with 'By no means!' and says we died to sin—directly answering the implication in Gal 2:17.

Hebrews 7:24-28 emphasizes Christ's permanent, sinless high priesthood who saves completely, refuting any notion that He ministers sin.

1 John 3:5 Parallel

1 John 3:5 states Christ appeared to take away sins and has no sin—directly opposing the suggestion He could be a minister of sin.

In 1 John 3:8-9, believers born of God cannot continue in sin—countering the implied permission to sin from justification by faith.

Romans 4:5 Parallel

Romans 4:5 describes justification of the ungodly by faith—foundational to Paul's argument that being found in Christ does not make Him a minister of sin.

Romans 6:15 Parallel

Romans 6:15 asks the same rhetorical question about sinning under grace, with Paul's emphatic 'By no means!'—identical argument.

In Romans 9:30-33, Israel's pursuit of righteousness by works led them to stumble over Christ—explaining why the objection in Gal 2:17 fails.

In 1 Corinthians 6:15, Paul uses the same emphatic denial ('Certainly not!') to reject a false implication of union with Christ, mirroring his argument here.