“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
Post a Comment