IN DEFENSE OF THE GOSPEL OF GRACE. GALATIANS2:1-10


“Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also.” Gal2:1

The book of Acts records five clear visits that Paul made to Jerusalem:
(1) The visit after Paul left Damascus, approximately three years after his conversion. We looked at that already in Galatians1:18-20 and Acts9:26-30;
(2) The famine relief visit which is also recorded in Acts 11:27-30;
(3) The visit to attend the Jerusalem Council which is recorded in Acts 15:1-30;
(4) The visit at the end of the second missionary journey recorded in Acts 18:22;
(5) The final visit which resulted in Paul's imprisonment and trial Acts 21:15-23:35

It is not very clear which visit he is referring to here. Likewise, it is not very clear whether the fourteen years he refers to are after his conversion or after his first visit to Jerusalem to see Peter and James. 

It could be that this visit is the famine relief visit of Acts11:27-30. However the only issue with that is the Acts 11 account only mentions Paul and Barnabas taking the offering to Jerusalem. It doesn’t mention Paul sharing his message with the Jerusalem leadership and apostles in a private meeting as is recorded here.

Instead, this passage in Galatians 2:2-10 more closely resembles the account in Acts 15:27-30 where Paul and Barnabas attended the Jerusalem Council over the matter of circumcision. This would make it the third visit. But again the issue with this is that in the Jerusalem council recorded in Acts15 Paul and Barnabas met the apostles and the other saints in a public gathering rather than a private meeting as Paul states in Galatians2:2. The only way this is possible is if there was first a private meeting with the apostolic leaders of the Jerusalem church before the official council where all the other saints also attended. However all of this isn’t really very important. What is crucial for us is the substance of these meetings.

Paul traveled once again to Jerusalem, probably from Antioch where he had been taken by Barnabas who sought him from Tarsus to go and minister to the Gentiles in Antioch. “Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul: And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.” Acts11:25-26

On this journey Paul and Barnabas were taking relief and supplies to help the Christians in Jerusalem who were in a severe famine. These they gathered from the brethren who were in Antioch. “Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea: Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.” Acts11:29-30.

Paul didn’t travel alone. He went with Barnabas, a Jewish Christian whose name meant “Son of Encouragement” (Acts 4:36), and Titus, a Gentile Christian convert who had not been circumcised in accordance with Jewish Law.

“And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.” Gal2:2

Paul didn’t personally initiate or decide to travel to Jerusalem, neither was he compelled or summoned by anyone to travel but rather it was by God’s revelation. “I went up by revelation…” It was God’s will that Paul should go to Jerusalem and He disclosed it to him by revelation that he should make the trip. Paul was being ‘led by the Spirit’ of Christ (Rom8:14; Gal5:18), and with him Barnabas and Titus went “up” (Jerusalem is on Mt. Zion) to Jeru­salem, and the timing of their trip accorded them the convenience to deliver the famine-relief contributions that were given by the brethren in Antioch.

When they arrived in Jerusalem, Paul explains that he went to the apostles “and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain

Much as Paul defended his independent commissioning as an apostle of Jesus Christ, he ob­viously did not advocate independence from the others or separationism and isola­tionism. Rather he sought consensus and solidarity with the leaders in the Jerusalem church. He was not a lone wolf preacher as the infiltrating Judaizers accused him of being.  

Paul didn't compromise, but he didn't seek to offend either. He had a private meeting with the leaders of the Jerusalem church because he cared about how they received his message and the impact that their opinion would have. He sought peace with these leaders and he obtained it.

Having said that, we should not misinterpret Paul’s motives and actions. He was not submitting his gospel of grace and liberty in Jesus Christ for the approval of the Jerusalem leaders. It’s not like he was asking them to accept and approve his message and literally permit him to minister it. From previous verses we know how Paul was totally convinced of what he was sharing that not even an angel from heaven would dissuade him from it. Rather, what he did was give them a full clear explanation of his gospel and his ministry to the Gentiles.

Another key point to note is that he did this in private consultation with those recognized and reputed to be leaders, rather than in a public council. Probably this was because in a private meeting there was the more likely prospect of sobriety in thought and a deep reflection on the things being discussed than in a public meeting where emotions would run high and people would be swayed by who made the most noise.

Paul’s fear of having run in vain is not an admission of lingering doubts about the gospel of grace which he preached. It’s not that he was afraid that they may reject his message and render his ministry and apostleship null and void. That’s not what he is saying. He is using a metaphor of Christianity being a race that all of us are running on the same team. There is therefore no need for us to be in competition with each other since we are on the same team. Competing against each other instead of against your opponents is running in vain. 

Paul did not want the church to be split into factions of Jewish Christianity based in Jerusalem and spearheaded by the apostles and Gentile Christianity based in Antioch or the other Galatian churches and spearheaded by Paul and Barnabas. This was a very likely scenario at that time. Paul understood that there is one church, one Lord and one Spirit in all of us. He did not want division among God’s people, but wanted them to be ‘one’ as Jesus wanted (Jn17:21) in the unity of ‘one Body’ (Eph4:4) with a universal gospel for all peoples.

We need to learn from Paul. There are many preachers and ministries today who have a truth from God who promote that truth at the expense of all other truths. They totally ignore unity among the body of Christ and instead brag about their refusal to compromise. This was not the way Paul conducted himself.

“But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised” Gal2:3

He now reports a very important point from his private consultation with the apostles. That Titus an uncircumcised Greek (Gentile) who was a Christian was not compelled to be circumcised. In other words, when the apostles found out that Titus was not circumcised and yet he was a Christian, they did not compel him to be circumcised. Apparently Paul must have disclosed this to them in the process of explaining the liberty accorded to the Gentile believers by the grace of God. Titus was his example/sample.

This indeed was what Paul intended by including Titus in his delegation. He was to serve as evidence or a test-case to estab­lish to all legalistic Judaizers the freedom of Gentile Christians to enjoy the grace of God without having to fulfill Judaic customs and Law-observances. If the apostles who were highly regarded and considered the leaders of the church didn’t compel a Gentile Christian to be circumcised in order to be a Christian, then that meant that circumcision was not necessary for one to be a Christian as the legalistic Judaizers had been claiming. This was a major coup for Paul against all his legalistic detractors. They wouldn’t have an answer to that.

Paul knew very well the importance that Jews placed on circumcision as the major physical sign and seal of covenant with God. However, he also knew that this physical sign was just a picture and shadow of the spiritual reality of the ‘cutting off’ of sin from the hearts of men by the Cross of Jesus Christ in the new covenant. Therefore he wasn’t going to stand by and watch as Jewish Christians forced Gentile Christians to add physical circumcision as a prerequisite for being a Christian.
We should not intentionally try to offend the religious traditions of others. Yet, when adherence to religious tradition is substituted for or added to the gospel, we cannot accept that. If Titus didn’t want to be circumcised, nobody could force him.

Some scholars have speculated that though Titus was not ‘compelled’ to be circumcised, he vol­untarily submitted to it as a conciliatory gesture, similar to what Timothy did in Acts 16:3. This is very unlikely, since the contexts were very different. At this particular time such an action would have greatly undermined Paul’s position on the purity of salvation by grace through faith. Timothy’s circumcision on the other hand occurred at a time when Paul’s message had been accepted and embraced as the gospel indeed. Besides, there is no scriptural evidence that Titus was ever circumcised.

“And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage” Gal2:4

Paul now explains the intense pressure that was put on them by some hard-liners advocating the necessity of circum­cision and other Jewish customers. These pressured them to capitulate and sell out the gospel by adding circumcision to the grace of God. Paul and the others refused.

These ‘false brethren’ who infiltrated the meeting in Jerusalem were probably in total agreement with the false-teachers who were infiltrating the churches of Galatia. They could even have been the same people. Or maybe these were the same legalistic fellows who were in Antioch declaring, “Unless you are circumcised accord­ing to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved” (Acts 15:1).
These were ‘false brethren’ or pseudo-Christians who did not understand or appreciate the gospel of grace and liberty in Jesus Christ. They most likely were not even Christians.  These are enemies of Christ who “disguise themselves as servants of righteous­ness” (2Cor11:15). And indeed we can see the true nature of their theology by the methodology they chose to use to discredit and compel Paul and Barnabas and Titus to embrace circumcision.

Paul says that these ‘false brethren’ like snakes would ‘sneak in’ and spy out the liberty of the saints of God in Christ. Let us consider this for a moment. How do you spy on someone to see if they are circumcised or not? You can't determine that by just looking at a person. You have to see them naked. These Judaizers were either following Titus to the bathroom or latrine. They became "peeping Toms" in the name of the Lord. They were committing a much greater sin than the one they were accusing Titus of. All in the name of holiness. This is entirely crazy and unbelievable. Religion had made these fellows stupid. These fellows were not motivated out of love. They were on a "witch hunt."

To this day their ilk continue to “spy out the liberty” of grace that we Christians have in Christ, in order to bring us into the bondage of religious rules, regulations and rituals. Religion is bondage! In fact the Latin word religare from which we derive the English word “religion” means ‘to bind up’ or ‘to tie back.’ Christ has set us free from religion.

Legalistic Christians today often operate in anger, hatred and cruelty with a judgmental attitude, which is much worse than the petty traditions they accuse others of violating. Churches have been split over points of doctrine that were nothing more than tradition. Things like who sits where, do we lift our hands during worship and so on and so forth

“To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.” Gal2:5

It wasn’t only Paul that refused to submit to these religious men. Barnabas and Titus also stood their ground and refused to submit to legalistic observations and customs. Furthermore, if you consider the context especially from verse three then you realize that the other apostles weren’t just standing by and watching what was going on. They too were on Paul’s side advocating for the liberty which is in Christ Jesus.  Therefore the plural pronoun ‘we’ is inclusive of Paul, Barnabas and Titus in conjunction with the leaders of the Jerusalem church, standing firm and refusing to capitulate to the agenda of the hard-line ‘false brethren,’ who were seeking to put the whole church in bondage again to the law from which Christ had set us free. They too defended the gospel of grace.

Paul was willing to take his stand and not back down an inch, so that the Gentile Christians in Galatia, and all Christians everywhere, might experience the blessing of Christian liberty in Christ, and not be imprisoned as slaves in the legalistic bondage of Jewish custom and religion. I bet the other apostles were sorely impressed with this man.

“But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me” Gal2:6

Though it may appear that Paul is sarcastically referring to the acknowledged leaders of the Jerusalem church with a derogatory and despising attitude, it isn’t what Paul is saying. Being a godly man, and a man also in a position of authority, Paul knew that it is a godly thing to respect leadership since all leadership comes from God.

Instead, it is more correct to recognize that Paul is reacting to the excessive and exag­gerated reverence and respect that people had for these leaders that verged on almost worshiping them. This of course is not new or strange especially in our Christian culture today where we worship and adore ‘men of God’ as though they are much more special than the rest of us. 

I can give several examples of preachers, apostles, prophets, evangelists and pastors that are literally worshipped by their congregations and ‘fans’. We think that they can’t do anything wrong, they can’t say anything wrong, everything they do is perfect etc. We try to talk like them, minister like them, dress like them, wear the same hairstyles, adopt their accents and diction and so on and so forth. This happened even in those days. 

In fact one time while in Lystra Paul preached and healed a man that had been a cripple since the day he was born. When the people of that city saw this, they called Paul a god and brought oxen and garlands to sacrifice unto him and worship him. When he rejected this, they stoned him to near death. See Acts14:7-20. This still happens even today.

The false-teachers in Galatia were apparently lifting up the leaders of the church in Jerusalem as ecclesiastical authorities whose teaching and practice should be considered infallible. This is what the Catholics do with the pope. Paul knew that all author­ity was invested in Christ (Matt28:18), and that all Christian leaders are mere men who should not be afforded undue ex­altation or adoration.   

God is impartial and no respecter of persons (Acts10:34) and does not regard some men more important and better than others. He requires all of us to stand before Him only by His grace in Jesus Christ. Religion often stands in awe of human power and reputation, but every Christian should be as impartial to men’s positions as God is, and as indifferent as Paul was.

Paul did not act like this because of self-confidence or pride. Instead, it was because Paul had an intimate relationship with God and he knew the gospel he preached came by direct revelation of the Holy Spirit. When we are overwhelmed in the presence of men (however great they are) it is a sign that we have not spent enough time in the presence of the Almighty King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

Paul completes his point by saying that the Jerusalem leaders added nothing to his standing as an apostle. They didn’t supplement, improve­ or modify the gospel which is Christ only. They ‘contributed nothing to him’. If this offends you then you probably honor, adore and fear men much more than you should. You need to get to where you understand that men are just men. No man is worth anything on his own. Honor Jesus.

“But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter” Gal2:7

The good thing is that the apostles who were the Jerusalem leaders were not offended by Paul. They recognized that there was only one essential gospel which is the grace of God in Jesus Christ. And that this is what Paul was preaching to the Gentiles. They realized that God had committed His gospel unto Paul to the Gentiles. Indeed this is an important lesson for us to learn. God calls different people to different ministries in different locations among different people-groups. But the message stays the same. There is no “different gospel” with additional responsibilities, but there are diversified personnel and mission strategies for the sharing of the gospel of Christ. We can’t all share it in the same way, using the same techniques. But the message stays the same.

“(For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles)” Gal2:8

The same God energized Peter and Paul. He worked in Peter the apostleship to the Jews with the same message and He worked in Paul the apostleship to the Gentiles with the same message. The message was the same. God can designate different spheres of ministry for different people. There can be unity in the diver­sity of ministries within the one Body of Christ. Both Peter and Paul, as apostolic colleagues, were equally entrusted to minis­ter in their respective fields of labor.

It is amazing that God chose Peter to share the gospel with the Jews and Paul to share the gospel with the Gentiles. Paul was previously a Pharisee very well versed with Jewish law and tradition. He could have out-argued any religious Jew. Peter on the other hand was a near pagan himself just like the Gentiles. He would have been the best candidate to minister to Gentiles because he was just like them and would relate to them better. Yet, God's ways are not our ways. His ways are higher than man's ways (Isa55:9).

We are not asked to argue men into salvation or get them to associate with those who are saved just because of friendship. Salvation has to be a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit. It is the gospel that works in the hearts of men to bring them to repentance. It is not our wisdom and eloquence or personal relationship skills.

“And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.” Gal2:9

The term "the right hands of fellowship" implies a united missionary partnership to work together for the spreading of the gospel among Jews and Gentiles. Instead of Peter, James, and John correcting Paul's gospel, they approved it and encouraged Paul in his work.

The important fact is that Peter, James and John who were the leaders of the church accepted and acknowledged the apostleship of God in Jesus Christ that had been given to Paul. This apostleship by grace was not given to Paul as a possession but was the vital life of Jesus given to him as the complete basis of his life, being and activity. It was Christ living in Paul and working in and through him to touch the Gentile world.

Basing on that, the Jerusalem leaders together with the other apostles extended to Paul and Barnabas “the right hand of fellowship” recognizing their fellowship, oneness and solidarity in Christ, and endorsing their partnership and cooperation in their respective God-given ministries. By this act Paul’s gospel of grace was accepted and embraced by all the other apostles and he in a literal sense became one of them. There was no way the Judaizers would discredit Paul anymore without discrediting all the other apostles and the entire church. This was a major victory for Paul and Barnabas and without a doubt greatly encouraged and emboldened them to continue with their ministry.

Here is a big lesson for us to learn today. Our petty squabbles of religion, often fought over the slightest of doctrinal differences, often result in “the left foot of disfellowship”. Those that we don’t agree with or those that don’t conform to our views or our organizations we label as cults or heretics and any message different from what we believe we label as heresy. If only we would give them the benefit of listening to what they are saying (especially in context) we would find that most of the time our criticisms and judgments of others are not based on facts but rather on rumors and misinterpretations.

“Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.” Gal2:10

As he concludes his defense of the gospel, Paul now notes that the leaders of the church in Jerusalem “only asked us to remember the poor; the very thing I also was eager to do.” It wasn’t like a law or an obligation Paul had to fulfill. Rather, the Jewish-Chris­tian leaders happy with what Paul and Barnabas had done in bringing financial relief to the suffering Christians in Jerusalem were urging them to continue to remember the Christians in Judea and elsewhere who had been forced into economic deprivation either by Jewish persecution or by agricultural famine.

Paul, Barnabas and Titus had given monetary gifts and money to the church in Jerusalem for distri­bution to those in need during this visit. The apostles and Jerusalem leaders wanted this generosity to continue not only to those in Judea but also to all the other needy brethren they would encounter anywhere else. Christians should not become detached from their concern for the poor. It is our job to help the needy. Indeed Paul indicates that he was eager to continue the collections from the Gen­tile churches for the poor saints in Judea, for this served as a consistent expression of the love, compassion and generosity of Christ in Christians. The operation of the grace of God in us will inevitably be expressed as Christ works in us and through us for others.

IMPORTANT QUESTIONS;

Let us consider these important questions for a while
What if the other apostles who were the Jewish-Christian leaders in Jerusalem had not agreed that the essence of the gospel is the grace of God which is in Jesus Christ alone?
What if they had refused to accept Paul’s gospel of grace and liberty to the Gentiles?
What if they had de­manded that Paul modifies his message by adding to it some law-observance in addition to faith in Christ?
What if they insisted that faith in Jesus wasn’t enough and that one had to also live holy, be circumcised etcetera?

We know that there is only one way Paul would have responded to this;

“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.” Gal1:8-9

Paul would no doubt have pronounced the anathema curse on them for seeking to change the gospel from the reality of Christ’s life and grace to a human performance message.
Under no circumstances would Paul have sacrificed the gospel of grace, which had become the essence of his life and ministry, for a legalistic message of per­formance righteousness.He would without a doubt continue to share Christ with the Gentiles as God had directed him to do.

The negative consequence of such a scenario would of course be that the universality of the gospel and the external unity of the Body of Christ would have been compromised.

The Church would have been divided into two distinct groups; the Jewish Church led by the apostles Peter, James and John (maybe we would call it the Petrine church after Peter), and the Gentile Church led by Paul and Barnabas (maybe we would call it the Pau­line church).

Indeed we see that centuries later the church was split into the two distinct camps of the Western Roman Church based in Western Europe and the Eastern Orthodox Church based in Eastern Europe.
Later, even the Western Roman Church split into the distinct camps of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism in the sixteenth century. Most of the Christian denominations today belong to either of these two camps. 

Of course the questions we have posed are hypotheti­cal. Much to the credit of the Jerusalem leaders (the apostles) and Paul, they listened to the Spirit of God within them and preserved the unity of the Church in the essential gospel of grace and liberty in Jesus Christ.

In certain circles, some have questioned whether this chronology of events in Paul’s own life is of any real value to us. Is this stuff relevant to us today?

Of course it is. First of all it is scripture and ALL scripture is relevant to us today because God deemed it necessary for us to have it. It is either for doctrine, for reproof, for correction or for our instruction unto righteousness. (2Tim3:16)

Secondly, history is important to Christianity! All the gospels are history. It is a chronological autobiography of the life and ministry of Jesus while he was on earth. If there had been no documented historical evidence of Christ’s earthly life and ministry, Chris­tianity would be relegated to nothing more than mere stories, mystical speculation, creative conjecture and philosophical or theological reasoning without documented proof. Jesus would be a myth.

Thirdly, this narration of Paul’s defense of the gospel of the grace of God, serves as a model for us since there is a persistent effort by the religious legalists to drag the church back into the bondage of the Law. There is a perennial need for Christians in every age to defend the gospel of grace against religious attempts to modify the gospel by adding behavioristic performance requirements.

Christians will at all times be called upon to “always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you” IPet3:15, and we need to be as firmly convinced as Paul was that the living Lord Jesus is the sole basis of the gos­pel and that He is the source of our personal identity (who we are) and our per­sonal purpose (what we do).

Only then shall we be able to stand before any so-called church authority (whoever they might be), take criticism from any detractors, and bear the persecution of any religious “false brethren,” who seek to bring us into bondage again. Like Paul, we will not be “ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, "The just shall live by faith.” Rom1:16-17

Comments