Gospel of Galatians
By: Mark Miller
Christ’s Church in the Clark Fork
3020 1/2 South Ave, Missoula MT
Inner Man Radio
Galatians Chapter 1
Apostle of Jesus
Deliverance
Different Gospel
Accursed Preachers
Pleasing God
Revelation of Jesus
The Revelation of Jesus II
Return to Jerusalem
Unwelcome
Galatians Chapter 2
Fourteen Years Later
Jews Only?
Acts Timeline
A Revelation
Jerusalem Council
Jerusalem Council II
One Flock
More Trouble
Peter’s Rebuke
“Blessed are the vexed” said Jesus never, “for they shall receive solutions.” Paul certainly didn’t rejoice in the problem which confronted the Churches in the Roman province of Galatia, but we can. His letter is the divine answer to their challenges and provides us with the same valuable insight. They had received the Gospel directly from the apostle, (Galatians 4:13) and Paul referred to them as his “children in the faith” — a term he usually reserved for those he had first taught the Gospel (I Corinthians 4:15) — but that pure calling was being challenged.
The Galatians were being troubled (Galatians 5:12) as was Paul, (Galatians 6:17) and their situation was grave. A hybrid gospel of Old and New Covenants had been introduced by Jewish Christians advocating a return to what they knew — the Law. The “elemental things” — Jewish observances of days, months, seasons, and especially circumcision — were poised to enslave them all over again, (Galatians 4:9-10) and nullify their covenant with Christ.
As for Paul, he makes certain to confirm his apostleship and the purity of the Gospel as in no other letter. Paul recounts details of his personal story here that do not appear anywhere else, and he includes the history of his personal battle for the freedom that is found only in Christ. If there were some in Galatia who challenged his message, it would be difficult to attack given his defense.
Paul testifies that his apostleship had been confirmed by no less than the pillars of Cephas (Peter), James and John. (Galatians 2:7-10) If any wished to detract from Paul’s message by insinuating that the leadership in Jerusalem held a different view on what should be required of the Gentiles, he put those questions to rest as well by citing the results of the Jerusalem council which he, Barnabas and Titus attended. (Galatians 2:1-3) Paul was the preeminent authority on the issue, though perhaps the most unlikely.
Of all the people God could have chosen to be His apostle to the Gentiles, God chose the most Jewish Jew. At first glance this seems foolish, but the Lord certainly had His reasons. Paul’s task was not simply to share the Gospel with the nations, he had to bring them into fellowship with those Jews who already formed the core of Christianity. Paul found himself in the awkward position of defending the Gentiles’ freedom in Christ against a skeptical Jewish constituency intent on maintaining the system of Law they were so proud of. No one could do it better. Paul was chosen from birth for this task, (Galatians 1:15) and could thus speak to the Jews as their countryman, to the Law as a Pharisee, and to the Gospel as an apostle of Jesus Christ. We are indebted to the Lord, to Paul and the trouble in Galatia for the defense of our freedom in Christ — if you can keep it.
The author of this letter wastes no time before introducing himself. “Paul, an apostle… to the churches of Galatia” (Galatians 1:1-2) In so doing, Paul established his identity and authority to speak. He continued, “not sent from men, nor through the agency of man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead.” (Galatians 1:1) As an apostle of Jesus, Paul possessed authority to speak on His behalf to all matters of the Church. Thus to make such a claim was to demand the attention and deference of those who follow Jesus — then and now.
Paul is emphatic when defining what he means by the term “apostle” and this is helpful for us. “Apostolos” in Greek corresponds precisely to the English word “missionary” and means “one sent out.” Think emissary, messenger, or ambassador. Note that those sent receive their authority from the sender. Thus when Paul identifies himself as sent by Jesus, one ought to listen to his message. We typically reserve the term for Jesus’ 12 apostles who served as His witnesses/missionaries to the world (Acts 1:8), but the New Testament uses it in the literal sense as well.
The men of Lystra were astounded when Paul healed a lame man, and they assumed that Zeus and Hermes (Barnabas and Paul respectively) stood before them. It seems rather comical now, but it was imperative at the time that the crowds should be disillusioned. “but when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of it, they tore their robes…” (Acts 14:14) Notice here that both Barnabas and Paul are referred to as apostles. How can this be?
Barnabas is not included in the apostle roster of Acts 1:13, nor was he added later like Matthias (Acts 1:26). Nevertheless, Barnabas was an apostle… of the Antioch church. When the congregation “fasted and prayed and laid their hands on them [Barnabas and Saul], they sent them away.” (Acts 13:3) The pair were on that mission when the Lystra confusion occurred. Thus the missionaries/apostles from Antioch are correctly identified, and Paul was first an apostle of the Syrian congregation.
By the writing of the Galatian letter, Paul’s role had changed. His apostleship had been recognized by the other apostles of the Lord at the Jerusalem council (Galatians 2:7-8), he had performed the signs indicative of a true apostle (II Corinthians 12:12), and was in no way inferior to the rest. He may have considered himself the least of that fraternity, even unfit to be numbered among them, yet nonetheless he was adamant. “But by the grace of God I am what I am…” (I Corinthians 15:10)
Paul was the only person who could write the letter we now read. His clout as an apostle gave him credibility within the Church, but it was his Pharisaical training in the Law which equipped him to refute the Jewish heresy of legalism. No one could have done it better.
Grace and peace. Nineteen of the twenty-seven New Testament books begin with this greeting, and Paul uses it without exception. It was his first sentiment addressed to the Galatian churches as well as his last. He saluted them with, “Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ,” (Galatians 1:3) and bid farewell saying, “And those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them… The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brethren. Amen.” (Galatians 6:16, 18)
Paul writes as if grace and peace were being sent from God the Father and the Lord Jesus alongside the apostle’s greeting. He identifies himself and brethren with him as senders of the letter, but it almost sounds as though the Father and Son have added their own blessing as well. Indeed grace and peace come from no one else.
People often read “grace” and think only “forgiveness,” but the most common usage of the Greek, charis (and the one that applies here) is favor. Paul desired and God provided that His divine favor and peace would be enjoyed by the saints in Galatia. However, the mechanism for that blessing would require more than warm wishes.
The sinful state of mankind presents a formidable obstacle to the relationship between God and His creation. A guilty conscience poisons the heart of man, and the resulting shame produces a mind hostile to its Creator. “because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God…” (Romans 8:7) In that condition — dead in our trespasses and sins — we were by nature children of wrath. (Ephesians 2:3) Even so, we were saved through Jesus, “who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us out of this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father.” (Galatians 1:4)
Paul claimed their age was evil. John writes that, “…the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.” (I John 5:19) I don’t know if the world that John and Paul knew was any better or worse than the one in which we live, but its ruler hasn’t changed. Since the fall of man, sin has corrupted mankind and set him against his God. The days of Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus — every age is overshadowed by evil, and yet in each God found and saved some.
God flushed the world, but He saved Noah. He cremated Sodom and Gomorrah, but Lot escaped. “then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment” (II Peter 2:9) God has delivered us from the power of this present evil age as well. With every temptation is a way of escape, and grace to help in time of need. Not even the impregnable city of Jericho could prevent the Lord from rescuing from its rot, those who were righteous through faith. God can and does deliver.
In 1937 the Netherland’s Boijmans Museum received a painting by renowned 17th-century Dutch master, Johannes Vermeer. The Rembrandt Society paid the modern equivalent of 11.7M to acquire The Supper at Emmaus, a beautiful example of the Golden Age, and according to the revered art historian of the day: “the masterpiece of Johannes Vermeer of Delft.” For nearly a decade it was applauded and admired and would likely have remained so still were it not for the legal trouble of Han van Meegeren. To clear his name of another charge, he confessed to forging the “greatest Vermeer.”
Paul was no art historian, but the apostle knew a fake when he saw one. He wrote in disbelief to the Galatian churches, “I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you, and want to distort the gospel of Christ.” (Galatians 1:6-7) The saints had been schnookered; another gospel had been swapped for the original. Only a close inspection would reveal that freedom in Christ had been replaced by a hybrid of Law and grace. This “Jewish-Christianity” would prove fatal, thus Paul worked diligently to reveal the forgery.
I think it doubtful that any of the Galatians would have described their situation in the dire terms of “deserting Christ” or “different and distorted Gospel” used by Paul. However, subtle errors are the hallmark of demonic doctrines. Something so simple as abstaining from certain foods sounds innocuous enough, but the source of such misdirection is Hell itself. (I Timothy 4:1-3)
The Galatians had been lured from the singular truth of the Gospel for the empty promise of another, and their error serves as a warning for those who follow. “Pay close attention [Paul told Timothy] to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things; for as you do this you will insure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you.” (I Timothy 4:16) Paul trusted Timothy like his own son, but the Gospel is too important to be taken for granted. He closed the letter with a similar warning, “O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, avoiding worldly and empty chatter and the opposing arguments of what is falsely called “knowledge” (I Timothy 6:20)
Critical independent thinking is a necessary part of Christianity, and the Bereans are commended for theirs. They were considered more noble minded, because they were, “…examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things were so.” (Acts 17:11) As long as there are counterfeits attempting to lead God’s people astray, vigilance will remain the price of freedom. Paul did not yield the truth for even an hour, and we mustn’t either. (Galatians 2:5)
Paul recognized that the Galatians’ departure from the true Gospel wasn’t entirely their own doing, for “…there are some” he said “who are disturbing you, and want to distort the Gospel of Christ.” (Galatians 1:7) Some who promote a different Gospel do so unknowingly. Peter and even Barnabas had fallen victim to such pressure and unwittingly yielded the high ground of righteousness by faith to appease those who advocated circumcision, but others driven by selfish motives found an opportunity to leverage the early Church for their own gain. They found an audience with itching ears and altered the Word of the Cross to scratch that desire. The Gospel — then and now — is always in danger of being lost through neglect, distortion, or outright fraud.
Those who were disturbing the saints in Galatia were distorting the true Gospel, and Paul squared off against that influence. “But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8) No other Gospel must be tolerated, and Paul repeats the warning for good measure. (Galatians 1:9) The penalty for such infidelity is the Greek “anathema,” and our English transliteration shares both spelling and definition — set apart for God’s divine judgment/destruction.
Was Paul worried that he might also fall victim to various influences and preach a distorted Gospel? I think not. What did concern him however, was the possibility that some charlatan might attempt to pass off a letter claiming pauline origin and authority. It seems that such trickery was afoot and Paul warned the Thessalonians of just such danger. “that you may not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us…” (II Thessalonians 2:2) Letters signed by “Paul” were no guarantee of apostolic authorship.
To counter this threat to the genuine Gospel, Paul includes several security measures in this letter which confirm its origin. The first is his history. Paul describes details of his personal conversion and receipt of the Gospel in Galatians 1:15-17 that do not occur anywhere else in the NT. These are even absent from Luke’s account in Acts for which Paul was a likely source. Second, Paul reminded the Galatians of something only they would likely know. “but you know that it was because of a bodily illness that I preached the gospel to you the first time” (Galatians 4:13) He alludes to but does not divulge the details of his bodily condition — probably a challenge to his eyesight. (Galatians 4:14-15) Finally Paul signs the letter as only he would, “See with what large letters I am writing to you with my own hand.” (Galatians 6:1) Perhaps his eyesight still suffered, but Paul’s personal handwriting would serve to authenticate this letter and more importantly identify any future forgeries.
One of the easiest ways to call someone's message into question is to impugn their motives. If there was any doubt, Paul confirms his reasons for preaching the Gospel. "For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond servant of Christ." (Galatians 1:10)
The Gospel that Paul preached and defended was not compromised by ulterior motives. Pleasing men or himself was clearly not his goal — pleasing God was his first and foremost priority. Paul could have saved himself much trouble by preaching a more accommodating gospel to allow for Jewish views of circumcision. (Certainly competing "gospels" had been devised for that purpose). However, to do so would mean disappointing the God he lived to please. Paul’s motives — and therefore his message — were confirmed. If Paul had been searching for an easy way to make a living, he was doing it wrong. :)
Paul similarly defended his motives to the church in Thessalonica claiming that his preaching was "… Not as pleasing men, but God, who examines our hearts.” (I Thessalonians 2:4) God certainly knows the hearts of men, but the necessary sacrifices to obey and preach His Word reveal their contents to us. His suffering and mistreatment in Philippi coupled with his continued preaching made Paul's motives clear to himself and to everyone else as well. He was neither flattering nor driven by greed or vain glory; his humble and gentle demeanor provided further proof of his intentions. (I Thessalonians 2:8-11)
Such examination has another fortunate side effect; it weeds out those who might preach the Gospel for any reason other than pleasing God. At some point, the temporal cost is too great if earth is the reward. Social status, wealth, safety, comfort, freedom — even life are all worth losing for the sake of gaining Christ.
Jesus gave us another test for motive. “Beware of practicing your righteousness before men to be noticed by them; otherwise you have no reward with your Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 6:1) He taught His disciples that the deed done in secret is the true indication of the heart’s desire. Contributions, prayer, and fasting (when done privately) reveal a desire to please the One who sees in secret. (Matthew 6:1-18)
Occasionally someone will ask if it is possible to truly know their own motives. The heart is deceitful after all, and perhaps they are simply deluding themselves. For a short time I might be inclined to agree with them, but the long-term results of doing that which pleases God in secret and at personal cost will yield one of two results. You cannot serve two masters, Jesus said, eventually you must serve one or the other. (Matthew 6:24) Seek to please the Lord, and be a joyful bond-servant of Christ.
Paul was adamant about the authenticity of his Gospel. "For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man.” He explained, “For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.” (Galatians 1:11–12) This portion of Paul's personal history is unique to Galatians. No other letter or account includes the details given here, and it was important to confirm it's genuine nature in view of the challenges brought against it by other supposed gospels. Paul’s claim is exceptional; he bases his authority to speak on the one who spoke to him – Jesus Christ, and we ought to listen.
Many are familiar with the Acts chapter 9 conversion of Saul of Tarsus who would become the apostle Paul. Driven by zeal for his ancestral traditions (Galatians 1:14) he persecuted Christians (whom he saw as an affront to Yahweh) with conviction. After pursuing the Saints in Jerusalem, he extended his reach to cities abroad including Damascus. It was on his way to that city that Saul was confronted by the Lord Jesus. The Savior’s only instructions were to continue to Damascus, where an as-yet-unknown Ananias would provide further instructions. The now-blind Pharisee obeyed and waited repentantly for his promised guide. Three days later, Ananias arrived as promised and after restoring Saul’s sight, baptized him without delay. Saul’s conversion was finished, but his education was just beginning. (Acts 9:1-19)
It would appear from Acts 9 alone that Paul was strengthened and went directly to the synagogues proclaiming Jesus that, “He is the Son of God.” (Acts 9:20) But Galatians adds significant detail to the story. “…I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went away to Arabia, and returned once more to Damascus. Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem…” (Galatians 1:16-17) Three items are important to note in this passage which are absent from Acts. 1) Paul was in Damascus twice before going up to Jerusalem 2) Between those visits to Damascus, he journeyed to Arabia, and 3) there was a three-year interval prior to that Jerusalem trip.
The investigation into Paul's personal history can be tedious. It takes a little work to fit the pieces of that puzzle together, but the result is worth the effort. Paul makes an extraordinary claim about his receipt of the Gospel, and thus extraordinary evidence is required. Next week we will finish joining Acts and Galatians to verify that claim and better understand just what Paul received directly from the Lord. Fortunately, for the Galatians and for us, the word of the Cross, God’s call to mankind, was delivered and confirmed so that you also may believe.
There are three elements of Paul’s history as provided in Galatians 1:15-18 that have no corresponding reference in the book of Acts. They are: 1) Paul was in Damascus twice before returning to Jerusalem 2) Between those visits to Damascus, he journeyed to Arabia, and 3) there was a three-year interval prior to his Jerusalem return. Now let’s overlay that narrative with the history of Acts.
First, we notice that there are two descriptions of Pauls’ stay in Damascus. Acts 9:19-20 says, “Now for several days he was with the disciples who were at Damascus, and immediately he began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God.” However in v. 23 it appears that his stay was somewhat longer. “When many days had elapsed, the Jews plotted together to do away with him.” (Ac 9:23) Was Saul in Damascus for several days (Acts 9:19) or many days (Acts 9:23)?
If we read the Acts account alone, it would appear that after Saul was baptized, he was in Damascus for several days, then he began preaching for many days until the Jews plotted his demise and he was forced to flee to Jerusalem. Unfortunately this does not allow for the three-year gap, Saul’s trip to Arabia, or his return to Damascus. (Galatians 1:17-18)
The only solution that fits all the clues is to place Saul’s Arabia trip squarely between Acts 9:19 and Acts 19:20. Only several days elapsed before Saul journeyed to Arabia. Similarly he wasted no time upon his return for he immediately began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues. Many days elapsed thereafter, but not three years, thus we must conclude that the bulk of those three years between his conversion and his return to Jerusalem were spent in Arabia. But what was he doing there?
This additional history is given in Galatians to buttress Paul’s claim that he received the Gospel directly from the Lord Jesus Himself. (Galatians 1:12) When might that have occurred? It seems likely that the purpose of Saul’s Arabia trip was just that. When Saul returns to Damascus in Acts 9:20, he is no longer the dazed traveler of the Damascus road nor the penitent Pharisee that Ananias instructed. Instead, “immediately he began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God.” (Acts 9:20) The man who would be Paul spoke with the same confidence seen in earlier apostles who had learned from the same teacher. “Now as they observed the confidence of Peter and John and understood that they were uneducated and untrained men, they were amazed, and began to recognize them as having been with Jesus.” (Acts 4:13) Three years were required to train the original twelve and Saul—it seems—received the same.
Upon returning to Damascus, Saul wasted no time. “and immediately he began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God.” …But Saul kept increasing in strength and confounding the Jews who lived at Damascus by proving that this Jesus is the Christ.” (Acts 9:20-22) Saul had been in Arabia for the better part of three years, and in that time he had received the Gospel directly from the Lord Jesus. He was zealous before, but now his fervor found new focus. He threw himself into preaching the Gospel, but the obstacles he faced were perhaps not those he had expected. The first resistance Saul confronted was from his own people. The Jews of Damascus did not take kindly to his new-found faith or his penchant for confounding them by proving Jesus to be the Christ. They reverted to a time-honored defense against his superior Biblical knowledge and argumentation — murder. However, their plot became know to Saul, and he fled to Jerusalem. “but his disciples took him by night and let him down through an opening in the wall, lowering him in a large basket.” (Acts 9:25) The ministry of the great apostle Paul was—one might say— off and running. ;)
After their conversion, many folks are surprised to find their friends and family to be less than enthusiastic. The new believer’s eyes are open, and they sometimes have trouble understanding why those of their social circle are not open also. Can’t they see the truth before them? Saul’s Damascus experience as the recipient of Jewish persecution was to be the first of many. Though he consistently brought the Gospel “to the Jew first, and also to the Greek,” he identified the problem they faced. Their rejection of the Messiah had produced a partial hardening of Israel; some would be grafted in again, but others would remain enemies of the Gospel. (Romans 11:25, 28)
Saul arrived in Jerusalem for what would be a bittersweet homecoming. When he left the capitol three years earlier, he was a promising and ambitious young Pharisee with the world at his feet, but he returned as a pariah. Neither Galatians nor Acts record the welcome he received from Jewish circles, but it wasn’t long before the same debate strategy employed in Damascus was adopted in Jerusalem. “And he was talking and arguing with the Hellenistic Jews; but they were attempting to put him to death.” (Acts 9:29) Paul does not elaborate on his treatment from family and friends except to say, “But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ.” (Philippians 3:7) What did Saul surrender for the sake of Christ? Position, prestige, affluence, family, friends, career, stability, as well as futility, emptiness, blindness, pride, ritual, guilt, and failure. It was a good trade.
“Three years later I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas [Peter], and stayed with him fifteen days.” (Galatians 1:18) It was the logical place for the Pharisee-turned-believer to go after Saul’s welcome in Damascus had quickly run out. "And when he had come to Jerusalem, he was trying to associate with the disciples; and they were all afraid of him, not believing that he was a disciple." (Acts 9:26)
Saul’s history proved to be no small obstacle for the Saints in Jerusalem. After all, he was responsible for many of their deaths. In his previous occupation, Saul had done many things hostile to the name of Jesus of Nazareth. He confessed, "and this is just what I did in Jerusalem; not only did I lock up many of the Saints in prisons, having received authority from the chief priest, but also when they were being put to death, I cast my vote against them, and as I punished them often in all the synagogues, I tried to force them to blaspheme… “ (Acts 26:10-11) It's no wonder then that the disciples came off a little cold.
One man, however, was willing to accept the risk. Barnabas was not his given name, but it fit Joseph from Cyprus very well. He was dubbed son of encouragement, and he lived up to it. "But Barnabas took hold of him [Saul] and brought him to the apostles and described to them how he had seen the Lord on the road, and that He had talked to him and how at Damascus he had spoken out boldly in the name of Jesus” (Acts 9:27)
Barnabas’ vote of confidence was enough to get Saul a meeting with the apostles and access to the church. Whatever doubts certainly remained were diminished by his actions, for Saul was with them speaking out boldly in the name of the Lord. Saul’s boldness did not go unnoticed by the Jews either, and they plotted against his life, but where was Saul to go? The brethren sent him to Tarsus, his home town.
There are no shortcuts in Christianity. Saul’s prominence in Judaism, his persuasive speech, not even his miraculous Gospel gave him the necessary credibility to be used by God immediately. Word of his conversion spread, but it would take time. The same is true now. Many suppose that their success in business or the acronyms that follow their name ought to transfer to the Church. Alas, their fleshly mindset only confirms that any such respect would be misplaced. The measure of the Christian is no more or less than the welfare of the people God has placed in their care. It would take Saul some time to prove himself, but God had plans for Saul (once again) of Tarsus.
“Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also.” (Galatians 2:1) A great deal can happen in 14 years, and in Paul's case it certainly had. I must confess Paul's mention of 14 years is difficult to place into our timeline. Does he mean that 14 years had elapsed from his conversion, his return to Damascus three years later, or from his initial return to Jerusalem shortly thereafter? I cannot confidently claim any of those explanations, but we can be sure of the reason for his return—but first a quick 14-year recap.
After being run out of Jerusalem, the unwelcome former Pharisee had retreated to his hometown of Tarsus in Cilicia, where he remained until a friendly face came to call. Barnabas, who had befriended Saul in Jerusalem, had relocated to Antioch in Syria, where many disciples were being made, and the son of encouragement needed capable teachers. Saul would be a perfect fit. Barnabas made the short trip from Antioch to Tarsus, found Saul, and brought him back to Antioch, where he—with several other teachers—taught the new disciples. While doing so the Lord instructed the congregation there to send Barnabas and Saul on their first mission trip, and with fasting, prayer, and the laying on of their hands they did. (Acts 13:3)
The duo traveled to Seleucia, Cyprus, Salamis, and Paphos (where Saul was recognized as Paul), Perga, and Antioch of Pisidia, but then something unexpected happened. When the Jews of that city began to contradict and blaspheme, Paul and Barnabas announced they would speak to the Gentiles. A major development in God’s plan had occurred. They continued to preach to the Gentiles through Iconium as far as Derbe (where Paul was stoned) before retracing their steps to Antioch.
Fourteen years passed before Paul found himself again in Jerusalem, but this time the visit was different. He described the purpose for his trip this way. “It was because of a revelation that I went up; and I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but I did so in private to those who were of reputation, for fear that I might be running, or had run, in vain. But not even Titus, who was with me, though he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.” (Galatians 2:2-3) This statement is particularly important and revealing. Paul claimed that his trip was: 1) due to a revelation, 2) concerned the gospel to the Gentiles, and 3) dealt with the issue of Gentile circumcision. Why was the Jerusalem council necessary? The answer will surprise you.
False brethren—Paul says they were to blame for the controversy which required that he, Barnabas, and Titus go up to Jerusalem. Of those scalawags he said they, “…sneaked in to spy out our liberty, which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage.” (Galatians 2:4) Only a face-to-face discussion would put all cards on the table and resolve the issue.
The meeting, as Paul described it, concerned four elements: 1) a revelation, 2) the gospel to the Gentiles, 3) Paul’s fear that he may have run or labored in vain, and 4) circumcision. (Galatians 2:2-3). We will return to these in more detail, but first we must examine a strange incongruence.
In Acts 13 the church in Syrian Antioch sent out Barnabas and Saul to the work God had called them. In Salamis, they proclaimed the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews. (Acts 13:5) At Paphos they found a Jewish false prophet. (Acts 13:6) In Antioch of Pisidia, they went into the synagogue (Acts 13:14), and Paul addressed the audience respectively as, "Men of Israel, and you who fear God” (Acts 13:16) and, "Brethren, sons of Abraham's family, and those among you who fear God.” (Acts 13:26). Acts 13:43 identifies them as, “many of the Jews, and of the God-fearing proselytes.” Since they left Antioch of Syria, Paul and Barnabas had spoken to Jews only. Thus it was a major development in Acts 13:46 when they said, “Behold, we are turning to the Gentiles."
Why would Barnabas and Paul preach only to Jews, especially when their departure from Antioch of Syria in Acts 13 takes place after Peter’s visit to Cornelius' house (a Gentile) three chapters earlier? Certainly they would have heard about the inclusion of the Gentiles when visiting Jerusalem in Acts 12… wouldn’t they? They did not. Because Acts 12 happens before Acts 10.
I know some of you right now are preparing your letters of protest. No doubt you will remind me that the book of Acts is written by Luke, who begins his Gospel with the useful preface that his account proceeds in consecutive order. (Luke 1:3) Thus we may assume that his sequel (Acts) follows the same chronological pattern. Quite so.
However, it is not possible to tell multiple stories at the same time. God was working simultaneously in Syria, Judea, and Samaria to move the Gospel from Jew to Greek. Peter, Paul, and their companions would only discover later at the Jerusalem Council what had been afoot. If my contention is correct and the storylines diverge and reconnect, there ought to be markers in the text to signify such junctions. There are, and they will be our topic for next week.
Today's devotion may seem somewhat tedious, but indulge me—the payoff will be worth it. Only one solution appears capable of explaining Paul and Barnabas’ curious reluctance to preach to the Gentiles early in their first missionary journey (Acts 13) or the similar refusal by those of Acts 11:19 who spoke, “the word to no one except Jews alone.” Both instances are recorded after Acts 10, and thus one would assume that they were aware of Peter’s momentous visit to the house of Cornelius and the acceptance of the Gentiles.
To my mind, the only workable solution is that Acts 12 and 13 must precede Acts 10, and the Scriptures bear this out. To be clear, Luke writes in consecutive order, but not even the good physician can tell two stories simultaneously.
Acts begins with the formation and establishment of the early Church. In chapter 8 we are introduced to Saul of Tarsus, but then the narrative shifts to Philip. Notice how Acts 9:1-2 brings us back to Acts 8:1-4 much like a comic book might use the meanwhile… device. Chapter 9 follows Saul and provides a three-plus-year synopsis of his conversion before returning to Peter’s plot in verse 32 and the inclusion of the Gentiles in chapters 10-11.
However, vs 19 requires our attention. “So then those who were scattered because of the persecution that arose in connection with Stephen made their way to Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to no one except to Jews alone.” (Acts 11:19) Luke just rewound the tape to Acts 8:1-4! Take note how the two passages are each mirror images of the other. He then moves forward again, but this time he relates the history of the Antioch congregation leading to Paul’s first mission trip in Acts 13 and this momentous declaration: “…behold, we are turning to the Gentiles. For thus the Lord has commanded us, ‘I HAVE PLACED YOU AS A LIGHT FOR THE GENTILES, THAT YOU SHOULD BRING SALVATION TO THE END OF THE EARTH.’” (Acts 13:46-47)
We will discuss the significance of that announcement next week, but we must conclude today's devotion with a different observation. The book of Acts is not the story of Peter, Philip or Paul. In fact, that is what makes the narrative somewhat difficult to construct, for it does not strictly follow the characters. The protagonist of our story rather is the Gospel itself. In the initial chapters, we see its growth in spite of persecution. In chapter 8 it moves from Jew to Samaritan and eunuch alike. Finally the Gentiles are welcomed in chapter 10., and the message cannot be stopped. Acts is not the story of those who preached it, but of the Gospel they preached.
How had Paul arrived at the unorthodox conclusion that the Gentiles were welcome in Christianity, since in Pisidia he and Barnabas remained unaware of Cornelius’ conversion? Revelation is the answer. God reveals His plan to man when the Omniscient deems it appropriate, and in the way He sees fit. In this case, Paul described God's revelation. “For thus the Lord has commanded us, ‘I HAVE PLACED YOU AS A LIGHT FOR THE GENTILES, THAT YOU SHOULD BRING SALVATION TO THE END OF THE EARTH.’” (Acts 13:47) Rather than an audible voice from heaven, Paul heard Isaiah 49:6 as God’s direct command to he and Barnabas, and they took the revelation to heart preaching to the Gentiles.
After returning with Barnabas to Antioch of Syria, Paul continued to welcome the Gentiles to Christianity without the initiation of circumcision. However, there were others who claimed that the Gentiles must submit to that Jewish rite. Paul described them this way, "but it was because of the false brethren, who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage.” (Galatians 2:4) The controversy was not easily resolved, thus a trip to Jerusalem to settle the issue with the apostles and elders was required.
In Jerusalem, Paul’s revelation concerning the Gentiles was the business at hand. “Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also. And it was because of a revelation that I went up; and I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but I did so in private to those who were of reputation, for fear that I might be running, or had run, in vain.” (Galatians 2:1-2)
Paul was not unsure about the Gospel of Jesus which he received directly from the Lord (Galatians 1:11-12). Nor did he need to share it with Peter and James since he had already done so upon his initial return. (Acts 9:27-28, Galatians 1:18-19) This trip fourteen years later concerned another revelation about the Gospel among the Gentiles, and Paul was mindful that perhaps he had misunderstood the Word of God through Isaiah. The summit would resolve the issue, but first a word about the Word.
When we read the Scriptures, it's easy to limit them to history, an accurate representation of God's work long ago, rather than what they are — God's Word which performs its work in you who believe. (I Thessalonians 2:13) God’s Word of revelation is just as living and active (Hebrews 4:12) today as it was when first spoken or freshly penned, and it continues to provide direction and insight into the will and character of its author. Pick up the Word afresh today, and let God reveal Himself to you.
Great dissension and debate is how Acts describes the controversy in Antioch. (Acts 15:1-2) Should circumcision be required of the Gentiles becoming Christians? Men from Judea asserted it was so, but Paul and Barnabas were unmoving in their opposition. The issue could not be resolved in Antioch alone; a trip to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem was required. Barnabas, who was already respected in the Jerusalem congregation, accompanied Paul on the journey along with Titus, a Greek who had previously traveled with them. Had Paul run in vain, preaching to the Gentiles without requiring circumcision? The council would decide. (Galatians 1:1-2)
Peter’s testimony is particularly significant. God had given the Holy Spirit to the Gentiles, "just as He also did to us, and He made no distinction between us and them cleansing their hearts by faith… But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are." (Acts 15:9,11) Peter may not have fully understood the ramifications of that statement, but he nevertheless removed the requirement of circumcision from the Jew as well.
Peter may have been first, but Paul and Barnabas were not far behind. They had been unaware of Cornelius’ conversion when they preached to the Gentiles of Pisidia, but the Lord had confirmed their revelation with the “…signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles." (Acts 15:12) Those same signs and wonders now found another application confirming God’s choice to the Jews of Jerusalem. Just as they had been unflinching in their stance in Antioch, Paul and Barnabas stood firm in their advocacy for the Gospel in Jerusalem. “But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour…” (Galatians 2:5)
James, one of the elders in Jerusalem, was the last to speak. The brother of Jesus summed up the testimony of Peter and added that of Amos. The prophet of 750 BC had anticipated the expansion of God’s plan, “In order that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by My Name.” (Acts 15:17, Amos 9:10-11)
The last word didn’t belong to an elder or apostle. The Scriptures themselves had the final say. Experience and even signs can easily be misinterpreted when viewed apart from Word. Thus in every controversy, the answer is not complete without chapter and verse.
False brethren, Paul said, had sneaked in to the congregation in Antioch. They intended to spy out their liberty in Christ and bring the saints into bondage. (Galatians 2:4) False brethren is a strong term, and so is accursed, yet Paul uses them both to describe those who threatened to distort the Gospel of Christ and nullify His grace. The underlying ailment was legalism, and circumcision was its symptom.
It appears that the church in Jerusalem never fully escaped its Jewish roots. The tradition of the Law was not easily left behind and neither was the desire to lord it over others. Legalism is always a means of gaining advantage, and Paul would not allow his work and others’ in Antioch to be undone.
Paul and Barnabas had recognized that the Gentiles were acceptable to God. Confirmed through the signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles (Acts 15:12), their belief remained unshaken even amidst potent opposition. “But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.” (Galatians 2:5) God had worked for Paul and Barnabas with the Gentiles just as He had worked for Peter among the Jews. The council recognized God’s obvious decision and confirmed the same. (Galatians 2:9)
It seems counter intuitive perhaps, but truth must be defended. Paul was not afraid of controversy, and he described his ministry in those terms. The apostle wrote, “…I am appointed for the defense of the gospel” (Philippians 1:16) and said as much when addressing his audiences as in Jerusalem. “Brethren and fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you.” (Acts 22:1) There will always be those who desire to twist the freedom we have in Christ for the sake of gaining an advantage, and there must always be others who are willing to stand firm against such attempts.
Not even Titus, a Greek, was required to be circumcised. (Galatians 2:3) The Jerusalem council agreed with Paul that the sign of Judaism should not be required of the Gentiles; Paul’s Gospel required no alteration. He summarized, “…those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me.” (Galatians 2:6) Perhaps they didn’t alter his Gospel, but something greater had been gained. The leaders of Jerusalem and Antioch had resolved their controversy with hands of fellowship and the truth of the Gospel had been preserved… for now.
The immediate result of the Jerusalem council was a letter written by the apostles and elders to the Gentiles; the burden of circumcision would not be placed on them. “and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we might go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised.” (Galatians 2:9) Judas and Silas, leading men of Jerusalem, accompanied the letter to Antioch to confirm its authenticity. The issue of circumcision had been resolved, but something far greater had been accomplished.
Jesus prayed that believers “…may all be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us; that the world may believe that Thou didst send Me.” (John 17:21) The other sheep about which Jesus spoke in John 10:16 had heard His voice and become one flock with their Jewish counterparts, and the Good Shepherd was leading the way. It’s unlikely either group fully understood the events that were taking place or their lasting significance, but the Lord was carefully providing for His people.
For the Gentiles their benefit was two-fold. Most importantly they had received the Gospel and become partakers of the grace of God. However, they also benefited from the heritage of their Jewish brethren who brought a treasure of knowledge from the Law and the Prophets which their newly-initiated brethren desperately needed.
The Jews also had much to be grateful for. Prior to the addition of the Gentiles, they had been allowed the dubious luxury of maintaining their traditions and simultaneously embracing Christianity. Though necessary initially, this marriage of Law and grace could not endure. God needed a way to force the Jews to rethink their relationship to faith, and the Gentiles were His answer.
If the Gentiles are saved by grace apart from the law (as symbolized by circumcision), and if salvation is the same for all men, then it follows that the Law must be unnecessary for the Jew as well. “and He made no distinction between us [ Jews] and them [Gentiles], cleansing their hearts by faith… But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.” (Acts 15:9-11)
Both groups found themselves together in a new flock and dependent on each other. Judaism was obsolete and ready to disappear, and the Gentiles provided a way forward for God’s people. Conversely, the nations had no knowledge of God, which the Jews could provide. “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!” (Romans 11:33)
Paul by inspiration thought it important to include a little history for the sake of the Galatians to whom he wrote. Although they were hearing the arguments for the first time, the issue of circumcision and the associated keeping of the Law had been resolved years before. It was important that his readers know the issues confronting them had already been settled, and those rogues attempting to disturb them were acting contrary to the truth and the position of Jerusalem, from where they likely claimed support. The council had resolved the issue, but another challenge arose.
“But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision.” (Galatians 2:11) This is not further description of the Jerusalem meeting, since Peter appears in Antioch. This was worse.
James (ironically) writes about the danger of creating two classes of Christians based on externals. “My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism.” (James 2:1) This is precisely what had happened in Antioch when the Jews considered their Gentile brethren to be second-class. What was so clear to him in economic terms seems to have been lost on heritage, and thus hypocrisy was the result. However, the New Testament is clear. “As Christians we recognize no man according to the flesh…” (II Corinthians 5:16) Regardless of gender, race, wealth, or freedom, we are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28)
Upon his arrival in Antioch, Peter fellowshipped freely with his Gentile brethren, but men from James pressured the apostle until he withdrew. Paul seems particularly surprised that even Barnabas had been carried away by their hypocrisy. (Galatians 2:13) But how could it have happened? I beg your indulgence for a little necessary speculation.
It doesn’t seem possible that the debacle in Antioch could have developed in Paul’s presence. However, his second missionary journey would have provided ample opportunity for the problem to take root. Paul was absent from Antioch for approximately 2-3 years and some 3000 miles while taking the Gospel to the Galatians for the first time, then on to Greece and finally Ephesus in Asia. I suspect that upon his return to Syria and the Antioch congregation, he was surprised to find Peter and his friend, Barnabas, entangled in hypocrisy.
Paul returned to Antioch of Syria to find his beloved congregation in disarray. The influence of legalism had crept in again, but this time it had ensnared Peter (visiting from Jerusalem) and even Barnabas. The Christians of Jewish background were withdrawing from their Gentile brethren in order to compel their adherence to the Law and traditions. The body of Christ was being divided, the freedom in Jesus threatened, and the truth of the Gospel bent. Paul did not pull his punches. “But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, “If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?” (Galatians 2:14)
Peter may have paused for a moment before answering Paul’s rhetorical accusation; most folks do when they read it. Allow me to restate the charge with some added explanation. If you, Peter, (as a Jew to whom the Law came), live as a Gentile (one without the Law), how can you compel those who were not born under it to live as though they were? Put another way, Peter, if you don’t keep the Law, how can you force others to? That is the definition of hypocrisy. There is no partiality with God (Romans 2:11) and that applies not only to the grace we receive, but the obligations we assume as well. For just a moment, let’s consider what could have happened next. If Peter been a lesser man, he might have yielded to Jewish pressure, spurred on by their zeal for the Law and the clout it afforded. He might also have surrendered to pride. After all, he was the chief apostle, and who was Paul to speak to him in this way? Finally of course there is the injury of being called on the carpet in public. If pride or anger had been Peter’s response, what might have happened next? Disaster.
If Paul and Peter do not agree on this point, it is my view that a MAJOR rift would have instantly developed between the congregations in Antioch and Jerusalem and more broadly among the Gentile/Jewish brethren respectively. Many—no, thousands—of the saints would have been uncertain about the nature of grace and therefore in jeopardy. The work of the previous Jerusalem council would have been nullified and the Church left reeling. It’s never easy to stand for what is right, but sitting down when you were wrong is harder. We credit Paul with the former, but I personally admire Peter for the latter. The Devil’s schemes came to naught, and we owe both men a great debt for their devotion to the Lord Jesus Christ.