Same Gospel to Jews and Gentiles

Transcript

GR 1143
02/07/99
Same Gospel to Jews and Gentiles
Galatians 2:1, 2
Gil Rugh


Turn in your Bibles to the book of Galatians and the second chapter, if you would. Paul’s letter to the Galatians. In the first two chapters of this letter, Paul is giving a personal defense of his own apostleship. And in that context is a defense of the gospel that he had received as a direct revelation from God as an apostle. The apostle Paul faced a continual and relentless opposition to his ministry.

At the root of the opposition to Paul’s ministry as an apostle was the opposition of Satan to the message that Paul was preaching concerning Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Savior of the world. And part of the way that Satan would work is he would constantly attempt to undermined people’s confidence in Paul as an apostle and so cause them to have questions and doubts about the truth that he would preach.


Back up a few pages in front of Galatians, to the book of 2 Corinthians. Just before the book of Galatians, 2 Corinthians, chapter 10. Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians, he takes chapters 10, 11 and 12 to give an extended defense of his position as a divinely appointed apostle of Jesus Christ. And, again, the persecution, the opposition becomes very intense and very personal. Look in chapter 10, verse 10, “For they say (These are his critics.), ‘His letters are weighty and strong, but his personal presence is unimpressive, and his speech contemptible.’” What they’re saying here there is a difference between what Paul writes and what Paul is. He can write a good letter, and he says some strong things in his letters, but that’s not the way he is in person. In person, he’s a rather weak character and not a very good speaker.

What are they saying? There’s two Pauls. And so you’re getting a person who’s not really presenting himself as he is when he writes you these letters. Undermining confidence in the trustworthiness of Paul. And in that context, they become rather personal. He’s personal presence is unimpressive. Well, when you stop and think about it, what does that have to do with the message? If the apostle Paul were to stand here, as he is often depicted, short, frail, not real attractive man, does that change anything regarding the truthfulness of his message? If he starts to speak and he doesn’t speak very effectively or very fluently, does that change the truthfulness of what he is saying? But his critics realize that people easily get caught up in the superficial, appearance things. And besides, if they can give you the idea that he is trying to “put on” and pretend to be something in his letters that he’s really not, you don’t have great respect or confidence in such a person.

So, he spends chapters 10, 11 and 12 defending his apostleship. And then come over to chapter 12. He says in verse 11, “I have become foolish.” He says what I did I had to boast about myself, I had to tell you all the things that God has done in my life, I had to tell you about the tremendous revelations He gave me from heaven, I had to tell you He even transported me to the third heaven that I might learn more of Him. Foolishness that I should have to talk about myself like that. “But you yourselves compelled me. Actually, I should have been commended by you for in no respect was I inferior to the most eminent apostles, even though I am a nobody.”

You see, the issue is very similar to the one that he was dealing with in the letter to the Galatians. “The most eminent apostles.” You see his critics were saying, Paul’s not on the level of the true apostles. The Peter, James, Johns. They’re going to be called the pillars in Galatians chapter 2. They’re the prominent apostles, as Paul will talk about them in writing to the Galatians. He’s not putting them down, but again, he has to make clear, he is in no way inferior to them. Why is that important? Is he proud? No! The reason for trying to say Paul is inferior to the other apostles is they want to undermine confidence in the message that he is proclaiming. And to say, oh, his message is not the same as Peter preaches, not the same as John preaches. He has made alterations, and he’s holding himself out as a representative of God with a message from God, but it’s not true and his message is not correct. So, again, Paul has to defend the fact that he is every bit as much an apostle as the greatest of the apostles.

Come over to Galatians, chapter 2. The opponents at Galatia are saying that Paul, at best, is a second hand apostle. He hung around some of the apostles in Jerusalem for a time, he learned some things from them, and then he took what they taught and adjusted it and corrupted it and is holding it out as divine revelation. Paul is demonstrating that he did not have contact with the apostles at Jerusalem, he did not get his message from them, rather he got it directly from God. And that has been the thrust of what he has been talking about through chapter 1. That continues into chapter 2, showing first that he did not get his message from the apostles in Jerusalem. Look down in verse 6 of chapter 2, “But from those who were of high reputation.” Those would be the most eminent apostles, as we saw them referred to in 2 Corinthians 12. Down in verse 9, these eminent apostles are identified as James, Cephas, and John. Then he goes on in verse 6 to say, “(What they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)--well, those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me.” Now, again, he’s not belittling these other apostles, but he is making clear [that] “I am an apostle, in and of myself, and receive my message from God not from them.” He’ll also show in chapter 2 that the gospel he preached was the same gospel that James, Cephas and John preached. And he will further show, in chapter 2, that the gospel he preached was the standard by which even apostles like Peter had to be judged. And when they were found to be in conflict with the message which Paul preached, they were rebuked for it.

So, you see, the authoritative message that had been given to Paul. And that truth from God stands above the human messengers. So, Paul didn’t get it from other men, he got it directly from God. Note how chapter 2 begins, “Then.” And this is the third time this little word has been used. It was used in verse 18, “Then, after three years, I went up to Jerusalem.” Giving an historical overview of his life after conversion to demonstrate that he did not get his gospel from the apostles in Jerusalem. So, “then” in verse 18 connects back to his conversion, when he was saved. “Three years after I was saved, on the Damascus Road, I went up to Jerusalem.” And we saw in a previous study he was only there for 15 days and he stayed with Peter. And during that 15 days he had an extensive preaching ministry that resulted in him having to leave the city because the Jewish leaders wanted to kill him. Not possible that he had been, ah, taught and instructed regarding the gospel during that brief time.

Verse 21, “Then I went into the region of Syria and Cilicia.” So, after leaving Jerusalem, after that short stay, he went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, which would include Tarsus, his home city and Antioch of Syria. And Antioch of Syria is way north of Jerusalem and Palestine. And then Tarsus is around the top of the Mediterranean, where the Mediterranean turns. Tarsus is there in Cilicia. He covers 11 years of ministry in verses 21-24 in summary fashion. Why? He’s only concerned to deal with the contacts he had with the apostles at Jerusalem to show that his message has divine origin.

Chapter 2, verse 1, “Then.” So, we had “then” in verse 18, “then” in verse 21, chapter 2, verse 1, “Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also.” After fourteen years. Some would say the 14 years is after his previous visit to Jerusalem in verse 18 which would make it a total of after 17 years, 17 years after he was converted. I think he’s probably connecting it back to the time of his conversion. In other words, “I was saved on the Damascus Road. Then, after 3 years I went to Jerusalem. Then I went into Syria and Cilicia. Then after 14 years I went back up to Jerusalem again.” So, I think, most probably, the 14 years refer to his conversion. If it’s in addition, it would be 17 years after his conversion. That does not make any difference in the position we’re going to take on an issue here, but at least to be aware of, ah, there are two views. But I think most are in agreement Paul is chronicling his conversion life. So, we’re 14 years into his conversion. Now, he’s going back up to Jerusalem again. So over the first 14 years of Paul’s life as a believer, his contact with the apostles has been very brief. He visited with Peter for 15 days in Jerusalem. Now he’s back up at Jerusalem again.

There is discussion, much discussion, over the visit of Paul to Jerusalem in Galatians chapter 2. Let me tell you what view I hold and then we’ll go back and look at the book of Acts. I understand it, the visit of Galatians, chapter 2, is a reference to the Acts 15 Jerusalem Council visit. In Acts, chapter 15, Paul goes to Jerusalem for what we call the Jerusalem Council. That’s what I understand is in view in Acts 15, I mean, Galatians, chapter 2. That’s different than if some of you are using the Ryrie Study Bible, which I am also using, the note there says, “Paul’s account of the events recorded in Acts 11.” In other words, he saying that, ah, the 14 years refers to Paul’s visit in Acts 11. We’ll talk about that in a moment. “If the letter was written to the churches in south Galatia, or less likely, Acts 15 if written to north Galatia.” Well, I disagree on those points. I think Galatians was written to the churches in southern Galatia and Galatians 2 is referring to Acts 15.

With that in mind, come back to Acts. We’ll review a little bit of the history. Start in Acts, chapter 9. Acts, chapter 9. Acts, chapter 9, verse 26, “When he came to Jerusalem,” and that’s the visit which is referred to in Galatians, chapter 1, verse 18. We looked at that in our study of that portion. Acts 9:26 is referring to his visit to Jerusalem after three years. Then we were told, down in verse 30, that when the brethren learned of the plan to put Paul to death at Jerusalem, “they brought him down to Caesarea and sent him away to Tarsus.” So, that was referred to in Galatians 1 as well. Then I went into Cilicia and Syria.

Then as we go on we pick up with the ministry of Peter, the rest of chapter 9 through chapter 10, we’re talking about Peter’s ministry. We don’t hear anything about Paul. Peter preaches at the house of Cornelius, to Gentiles, in Acts, chapter 10. Acts, chapter 11, you’re continuing with the ministry of Peter in explaining his preaching at the house of Cornelius.

Then come down to verse 27 of Acts 11, “Now at this time some prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. One of them named Agabus stood up and began to indicate by the Spirit that there would certainly be a great famine all over the world. And this took place in the reign of Claudius. And in the proportion that any of the disciples had means, each of them determined to send a contribution for the relief of the brethren living in Judea. And this they did, sending it in charge of Barnabas and Saul to the elders.” Then go over to chapter 12, verse 25, “And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem when they had fulfilled their mission.” This visit of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem in Acts 11 is called “the famine visit” because it was a visit that took place in the context of a famine. The believers in Antioch took a collection and sent it to Jerusalem to help the believers there. The believers in Jerusalem were under a two-fold burden. Number 1, there was intense persecution by the Jews because of their faith in Jesus Christ. You add to this the suffering that the famine brought and they were in dire straights. So, the believers in Antioch take a collection and have Paul and Barnabas take that collection to Jerusalem.

Now, before we say more about that visit, look at the context, chapter 12 of Acts. Now you’ll note, Paul and Barnabas go to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30. Then you have an account related of Herod, in chapter 12, and then in the last verse of chapter 12, Paul and Barnabas return from Jerusalem. Chapter 12, verse 1, begins, “Now about that time Herod the king laid hands on some who belonged to the church, in order to mistreat them. And he had James the brother of John put to death with a sword.” “Now about that time.” So, about the time that Paul and Barnabas took this contribution to Jerusalem it was a time of intense persecution as well as famine in Jerusalem. So, we have that time marked out for us.

You have the account of the death of James the brother of John. You have Peter imprisoned by Herod. The Herod here is Herod Agrippa the First. Herod is the family name, the dynasty name. So, you know, everybody’s Herod. His grandfather, Herod Agrippa we have in Acts 12, his grandfather was Herod the Great. Herod the Great was the one that was on the throne when Christ was born, the wise men visited him, he had all the babies under two years of age executed in Bethlehem. Well, this is Herod the Great’s grandson, known as Herod Agrippa the First.

Now I know, what does all this have to do with Galatians? Just keep track here a minute with me. Look down in verse 22 and 23. Herod gives an oration, an oration. And when he is up speaking, verse 22, “The people kept crying out, ‘The voice of a god and not of a man!’” They’re trying to get his favor. They need to be in his good graces. And knowing something of his pride and arrogance, they start to cry out, “He is not a man. He’s a god. Listen!” “And immediately an angel of the Lord struck him because he did not give God the glory, and he was eaten by worms and died.” So much for that god! This has extra-biblical collaboration. Josephus the Jewish historian writes concerning Herod Agrippa the First that he was giving a discourse, and in the middle of that discourse he was suddenly struck ill and for five days he lingered in great pain and died. We know from the Inspired Record that during those five days the worms were during their work on the inside and Herod died. Well, we’re not here to study about the death of Herod. What interests us is that Josephus tells us that Herod Agrippa the First died in 44 AD. So, you ought to have that marked in your Bible. If you have a study Bible it will have that date for you. If not, you ought to mark it in the margin: 44 AD. There’s just certain limited events in the book of Acts that we can tie down to specific dates. And that helps us place the rest of the book in perspective. Here is such a date. That’s significant to us because in verse 30 of chapter 11 Paul and Barnabas are going up to Jerusalem. And verse 1 tells us “about that time”. And then chapter 12 ends with them leaving. So we can identify the famine visit of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem as taking place in 44 AD.

Now Galatians chapter 1 tells us Paul went up to Jerusalem, Galatians, chapter 2, verse 1, 14 years after his conversion. Well, if that was 44 AD that means Paul was converted in 30 AD and we’re getting too close to the crucifixion of Christ for the events of the book of Acts prior to his crucifixion. If it was 17 years, if the three years are added on to the 14, then you’d be in 27 AD, you have Paul getting converted before Christ gets crucified, which is a real problem. So, you have a chronological problem. The Famine Visit is the visit that Paul is talking about in Galatians, chapter 2. Also, the content of Galatians 2 indicates that it’s the very issue of Acts, chapter 15, that is being dealt with in this visit to Jerusalem. So, what Paul describes in Galatians 2 fits Acts 15. Also, and we’ll see more of this in a moment, in Galatians 2 it becomes clear at the conference at Jerusalem, that occurs 14 years after his conversion, Paul’s reputation as having a broad and effective ministry among the Gentiles is also very well established. But if you’re talking about the famine visit of Acts 11 that occurs before any of Paul’s missionary journeys, which would create some other problem. All of that to say it doesn’t change the message we’re going to consider, but I think it helps to understand the flow of things. That I understand that Paul’s Jerusalem visit is a reference to the Acts, chapter 15 visit.

Well, then how do you account for him skipping over the Famine Visit? Isn’t that a serious deletion? Not really, because remember what he is trying to establish in the context of Jerusalem, his contact with the apostles at Jerusalem. Did he get his message from the apostles at Jerusalem? There’s no indication that he met with any apostles on his Famine Visit. In fact, the indication would be the opposite. We’re told in verse 30 of Acts 11 that he took the gift to the elders. Chapter 12 would indicate that the apostles are the subject of intense persecution at this very time. James has been executed. Peter is arrested. It’s not a time to hold a major conference on a particular doctrinal issue. In fact, the indication is probably that the rest of the apostles have left the city at this time. Down in verse 17 of Acts 12, after Peter is supernaturally delivered from prison by an angel, he reports to the believers meeting at Mary’s house and then, the end of verse 17 tells us, then he left and went to another place. The indication would be that he probably left Jerusalem at this time -- help take some of the pressure off of the church there, the leadership removes itself. They become the focal point of the persecution. So, that Paul and Barnabas could bring the gift to the church, but you don’t want to call attention to having, by having a meeting of the apostles and leadership of the church, and the church itself at the time you have an intense persecution taking place. So, those things would indicate that Paul passes over this because it’s not significant. He’s not giving a full history of his life. He’s giving the history of his contact with the apostles.

Now if you’re still in Acts, after Acts, chapter 12, you have chapters 13 and 14, which are an unfolding of Paul’s first missionary journey. And that first missionary journey takes him to the region of southern Galatia when he evangelizes that part of the world and establishes the churches that are the recipient of the letter that he is writing in the churches to the Galatians. And that first missionary journey establishes Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles. You’ll note in Acts, chapter 14, at the end of the chapter, when he returns from this missionary journey. Verse 26 of Acts 14, “They sailed to Antioch.” That’s where they began. Verse 27, “When they had arrived they gathered the church together and began to report all things which God had done with them, how He had opened a door of faith to the Gentiles.”
You see, it’s not until that first missionary journey that is becomes clear that the gospel will be carried in a significant way to the Gentiles. For sure Acts, chapter 10, Peter’s ministry, established that it was God’s intention to save Gentiles. But keep in mind, those were Gentiles within the confines of Judea and Jerusalem. They were Gentiles that had been converts to Judaism. That doesn’t minimize in any way the impact that the gospel will now be given to Gentiles, but the recognition that that will be a significant ministry of outreach now waits for the first missionary journey of Paul. He is the first to take specific travels to these Gentile areas and carry the gospel to them. So now Gentiles are being reached in a broad way.

[Verse 28,] “And they spent a long time with the disciples.” Then you come to chapter 15. Now the Council at Jerusalem. “Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, ‘Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.’” See what happens here. Paul and Barnabas have had an extensive missionary outreach carrying the gospel to Gentile areas in the region that would be known as southern Galatia. Churches have been established there. They have come back and reported this in the church at Antioch that it already had seen some Gentile converts. But now we’re seeing broad Gentile outreach.

You have some Judaizers, if you will, come to Antioch. You’ll note it says, “Men came down from Judea.” Well, geographically the men went north because Antioch is in, ah, Syria, far north of Judea and Jerusalem. But you always go down from Jerusalem in the Bible, or up to Jerusalem. It’s not only that it’s elevated but it a respectful way of speaking. But don’t get turned around. We’re going north. When they come down of Jerusalem they’re coming down, traveling north to Antioch.

And they begin to teach “the brethren, ‘Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.’” Now you realize this issue of circumcision for salvation would not be raised until there were numbers of Gentile converts. As long as the converts were Jews, circumcision’s a non-issue. They all got circumcised at eight days old, as Jewish boys. So, a Jewish man gets saved, believes in Christ, circumcision’s a non-issue. Why? Well, Jewish boys are circumcised at 8 days. So, there’s no issue of circumcision. They are all circumcised. But now you have, as long as you have Gentiles who were proselytes to Judaism. And so had probably gotten circumcised. That wouldn’t be an issue, not when they turn to Christ.

But now you have non-Jewish Gentiles, if you will, Gentiles without contact in any significant way with Jews, getting saved, they’re uncircumcised. And you realize, in the Old Testament the uncircumcised are a reference to the heathen, the uncircumcised Philistines. These Gentile men, now they’re professing Christ. Now it’s an issue. Don’t they have to be circumcised to be saved? “And when Paul and Barnabas had great dissension and debate with them (verse 2), the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue.”

As we move into Galatians chapter 2 you’ll get the flavor of the same meeting. The Jerusalem Council, incidentally, occurred in 49 AD. Most commentators seem, in light of the flow of Acts, to date the Jerusalem conference at 49 AD. And that’d be the case, 14 years prior to that, Paul’s conversion being around 35 AD would fit well with the flow of the crucifixion and the first missionary journey taking place and so on. When they get to Jerusalem, while you’re still in Acts 15 before we come back to Galatians 2, verse 5. While at Jerusalem, what happens? “But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed, stood up, saying, ‘It’s necessary to circumcise them, and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses.’” So, you see, at Jerusalem, there is a strong element from among the Pharisees, same background as Paul, who have become believers in Christ, but they are saying now it is necessary for these Gentiles that are getting saved in these regions beyond, they’ve got to be circumcised, they’ve got to keep the Law in order to be saved. So you have the conflict that Paul is dealing with in Galatians, chapter 2.

Come back to Galatians 2. You can see the danger in this. Church is experiencing intense persecution at Jerusalem. A key figure, like the apostle James brother of John, has been executed in chapter 12. Stephen was stoned to death back in Acts chapter 8. There’s intense suffering going on. And now you have Pharisees who have believed, who are declaring that Jesus is the Messiah, you must trust in Him! But you also have to be circumcised if you’re a Gentile and keep at least portions of the Law. There’s be tremendous pressure to give on the point in the name of unity. Look, as long as a person believes in Christ, they’re saved, right? In order to keep the church together and not fragment or divide at his key time when we need one another, let’s give on the point of circumcision. No damage can be done. Let’s give on the point of the Law, it won’t hurt anything and we will maintain the unity of the Church and keep the support of these believing Jews. And think how much stronger the testimony of the Church will be, not only at Jerusalem but in other places as well. And while you could make a convincing argument with such reasoning, you could not make a biblical argument with such reasoning. And Paul will have no other argument than a biblical argument. And we can thank him today for that, because, as we will see when we move in the future in Galatians 2, the future of the gospel is at stake. Which means the salvation of souls is at stake in this battle.

Come back to Galatians, chapter 2. “Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas.” So, fourteen years after his conversion, having had a great and effective ministry among the Gentiles on his first missionary journey, he went up to Jerusalem, the conference in Acts 15. Barnabas traveled with him and also Titus. Now Acts 15 tells us that, ah, there were others that went along with Paul and Barnabas. Titus is not mentioned. We’ll say more about Titus in a future study. But these two men were taken, I take it, for specific purposes. Barnabas would be well received and well recognized by the church at Jerusalem.

We have to go back to the book of Acts. Some of you will not remember whether we are studying Galatians or Acts. Go back to the book of Acts, chapter 4, to appreciate the significance of what Paul is saying here and doing, we need to have some background. Acts, chapter 4, verse 36, we meet Barnabas for the first time. Acts 4:36, “Now Joseph, a Levite of Cyprian birth, who was also called Barnabas by the apostles (which translated means, Son of Encouragement).” So Barnabas’ Jewish name was Joseph. He was a Levite, the priestly tribe. He was a native of Cyprus, a Cyprian, evidently now living in Jerusalem. We see him here very actively involved in the foundational stages of the church at Jerusalem. So he was a very early convert to Christ. We don’t know anything about his conversion, but here in Acts 4 he is already recognized as a spiritual leader in the church at Jerusalem. They have given him another name than Joseph, Barnabas. It means Son of Encouragement. Already, by this time in Acts 4, Barnabas was recognized for his ministry of encouraging and building up, strengthening other people.

Turn over to Acts, chapter 9. When Paul went to Jerusalem for the first time after his conversion, after three years, remember what we were told in Galatians? Verse 26, he came to Jerusalem, Acts 9:26. He was trying to associate with the disciples, but they were all afraid of him, not believing he had been truly converted. “But Barnabas took hold of him and brought him to the apostles and described to them how he had seen the Lord on the road, and how He had talked to him, how at Damascus he had spoken out boldly in the name of Lord.” It was Barnabas who sought out Paul in Jerusalem, took him under his wing, if you will, encouraged him, brought him to the other apostles, to establish that contact.

Over in Acts, chapter 11, verse 19, “So then those who were scattered because of the persecution that occurred in connection with Stephen made their way to Phoenicia, Cyprus, Antioch.” So, that persecution that had started under Paul resulted in believers in Jerusalem being spread throughout the world. The apostles remained anchored and centered in Jerusalem, but other believers left. You note, “Speaking the word to no one except to Jews alone.” So you see, even though Peter preached to Gentiles in Acts 10, the understanding of God’s plan to reach out to Gentiles with the gospel in a broad, focused way is still not understood.


“But there were some of them, men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who came to Antioch and began speaking to the Greeks and preaching the Lord Jesus.” So, at Antioch there are some Gentiles hearing the gospel and getting saved. “The hand of the Lord was with them, and a large number who believed turned to the Lord. The news about them reached the ears of the church at Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas off to Antioch.” So the news of conversions, Gentile conversions in the city of Antioch reaches Jerusalem. The apostles are concerned to find out 1) if these are genuine conversions; and 2) to see that they get firmly grounded in apostolic doctrine. Who do they send? Barnabas. That tells you something about their confidence in Barnabas, the stature that Barnabas had among the apostles at Jerusalem. That he’s a man that they have enough confidence in to travel there and carry their ministry to that place.

Verse 23, when he arrived he “witnessed the grace of God, he rejoiced and began to encourage them all.” He’s the Son of Encouragement. Verse 24, “He was a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and of faith. Considerable numbers were brought to the Lord.” The note verse 25, “And he left for Tarsus to look for Saul.” Now, remember Saul had left Jerusalem back in Acts, chapter 9, and gone to Tarsus. That’s where Saul was from, Tarsus. And what does Barnabas think? Paul’s ministry could be a great help and an asset in Antioch at this time. So, Barnabas goes to get Paul, brings him back. Verse 26, “When he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. For an entire year they met with the church, and taught considerable numbers; the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.” So, Paul and Barnabas have a good ministry together in Antioch. Then they travel to Jerusalem together at the famine offering, with the famine offering. Then to the Jerusalem Conference in Acts 15. Barnabas being Paul’s traveling companion on the first missionary journey in Acts 13 and 14.

Come back to Galatians 2. You can appreciate the wisdom of Paul taking Barnabas. Barnabas was well established among the apostles in Jerusalem. His reputation was spotless, if you will. The apostles at Jerusalem had confidence in Barnabas. Barnabas knew and was familiar with the apostles at Jerusalem, he also knew and was familiar with Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles. He had traveled with him on the first missionary journey. So Paul could be a great asset. I mean, Barnabas could be a great asset to Paul in this meeting at Jerusalem, ah, to establish the report and the kind of contact that would be necessary.

They took Titus along also. We’ll talk about Titus in our next study in verse 3-5. Titus is a Gentile convert of Paul’s, according to Titus, chapter 1, verse 4. Don’t turn there for now. He is an uncircumcised Gentile convert. And one of the reasons Paul will have him with him at Jerusalem, to make him a test case. Will the apostles at Jerusalem require that Titus be circumcised in order to recognize his salvation as legitimate or not? So, that becomes a test case. So Titus is mentioned here because of that role. Interestingly, Titus is mentioned no where in the book of Acts, even though we know he plays a key part in Paul’s ministry because of other references in Paul’s letter, and because of the letter that Paul will write to Titus. But we’ll talk about that at another time.

Look at verse 2 of Galatians 1(2), “It was because of a revelation that I went up.” Again, when you read Acts 15 there’s no mention that Paul had a revelation from Christ to go to Jerusalem. But that’s not unusual. In Acts, chapter 9, Paul left Jerusalem after his first visit. And you get no indication except the persecution and the disciples there thought it would be good for Paul to leave. But in Acts, chapter 22, verses 17-21, Paul later relates that it was a direct revelation from God in the Temple that caused him to leave Jerusalem.
So, here, even though the book of Acts, chapter 15, doesn’t say Paul went up by revelation, we’re told that it was a direct revelation from God that told Paul he needed to go to Jerusalem. Again, Paul is establishing his independence as an apostle. He didn’t go to Jerusalem because he had been summoned by the apostles to give an account. He didn’t go to Jerusalem because he felt it was necessary to get the approval of the Jerusalem apostles. He went up because God told him to go. Further establishing that he is an apostle that God directs directly.

“I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles.” I submitted to them. Crucial choice of words. It means to “lay before someone for consideration.” Paul didn’t seek their approval, he simply presented to them the gospel that he was preaching for their consideration. “Here I am, an apostle. I have received my gospel from God. Now, I present it to you for your consideration.” So that they might consider is this the same gospel we have received that they might come to agreement. He says, “I submitted to them the gospel which I preach.” And that verb “I preach” is in the present tense. Not the gospel which I preached, as though it was something he did in the past. It’s the gospel which I am preaching. No change. Same gospel Paul began to preach immediately upon his conversion and he was continuing to preach right down to that day. “This is the gospel I am preaching. I lay it before you for your consideration.”

I want you to note one writer, commenting on this, I think made an important observation. “It is instructive to observe that Paul did not confine himself to reporting his missionary work among the Gentiles. He was most concerned that the Jerusalem Christians should know the content of his preaching. To the apostles this was of paramount importance. In modern time there has been a tendency for the procedure to reversed, and sometimes for all too little interest to be shown by congregations at missionary gatherings in the character of the gospel being preached.” I would say that’s not only true of missionary gatherings, that’s truth generally. We, today, want to focus on testimonies, on people telling their stories. I’m not against testimonies, I’m not against them telling you a story. But, I’m saying, what the root issue is is the gospel. And we want to get on to hear the testimonies. And if we were doing this conference in Acts 15 that Paul’s talking about today, we’d have taken 30 of our best converts and let them give their testimony and that would prove our case.


The test case Paul will take up is to deal with the doctrine that he is preaching. The battle will be waged over the content of the message, not over how convincing are the testimonies. The Church of Jesus Christ today needs to keep that in mind. This gospel is the one he was preaching “among the Gentiles.” And that’s why we have the issue. When you preach it among the Jews, circumcision is not an issue because all the Jewish men are already circumcised. But this is the gospel “I preach among the Gentiles.” And now we find out what is the gospel. Even the Jerusalem apostles, now, have to grapple perhaps with the issue which they would not had to before, ministering among Jewish people. Doesn’t mean no Jews are saved under Paul’s ministry, but he went out among the Gentiles. In the ministry at Jerusalem and Judea, any Gentile conversions would be incidental, so to speak. The focus was Jews. But Paul’s ministry is among Gentiles. Any Jewish conversion are incidental, is you speak. The ministry is focused to Gentiles in Gentile communities, in Gentile cities, in Gentile parts of the world. And any Jews that are reached would be within that framework.

“But I did so in private to those who were of reputation.” Those eminent apostles. The pillars, as they are called in verse 9 of chapter 2. James, Cephas, John. Peter, James and John. In other words, he had a private conference with them. This private conference is not talked about in Acts, chapter 15, because that’s not the focus. The focus is on the conference, on the issues at the conference and on the decision of the conference. But here Paul tells us when he went up to Jerusalem, he had personal consultation with Peter, James and John. They were the leaders. To make sure they were together on the gospel, that there was no misunderstanding. You throw things out in the broader meeting, when you’re going to have the Pharisees, converted Pharisees there, and the Judaizers and this division, and people lose focus of what the issues are. This kind of thing first has to be grappled with by the leaders. And they work through the details to find out if they are preaching the same gospel. Then, it is dealt with in the more public way.

He did this “for fear that I might be running, or had run, in vain.” Paul’s not afraid that he has been preaching error, but he realizes the seriousness of this meeting, that it’s important that the apostles at Jerusalem understand the gospel that he is preaching. They understand the issues of grace, because remember they’d been ministering primarily among a Jewish population, or Gentiles that had at least been influenced by Jewish thinking, as Cornelius would have been. And if they, out of misunderstanding, misinformation, whatever, were to take a stand against Paul and his gospel, it would be devastating for Paul’s ministry. They would be saying, in effect, “No, we don’t recognize the conversion of these Gentiles.”

And so, Paul is very sensitive that if this is not handled properly then it could have a very detrimental impact on the preaching of the gospel that he does among the Gentiles, because people would think there is a different gospel being preached by the apostles at Jerusalem than is being preached by Paul. So, he uses wisdom here to meet and work through these doctrinal issues. Then they can be dealt with in the more public way.

Let me just wrap this up with a couple of comments. We’ve been looking at the history, but the history becomes vital in the context of the doctrine. And the crucial issue that is being dealt with is the clarity and the accuracy of the gospel. And this fact must not be blurred by any unhealthy reliance upon personal experience, stories, testimonies. To cut through, the issue is the gospel. Today the Church is unwilling to seriously grapple with the doctrinal issues that face it. And as a result we have a superficial unity. We want to include the Pharisees because they believe. And even though they say you also have to be circumcised and you have to keep the Law, at least we’re believing in the same Christ. And it is such a help to us in these days to have them identified with us. No, the gospel is at stake. It’s become clear in the verses we’ll be looking at in our next study.

So, the Church today we need to learn that lesson. First we must sort out the doctrinal issue. People want to say, “Oh, look what is happening!” Okay, I see what is happening. “Listen to the testimonies!” Okay, I hear the testimonies. Let’s grapple with the doctrine. What does the scripture say? What is the message being preached? Does it line up in detail with the truth that is revealed in the scripture? No, but those are things we’ll get to later. No, we won’t. We get to them now. The Church is under persecution. These are difficult days. The world’s pressing in on us. These are no days to divide over doctrinal differences. These are days to divide over doctrinal differences. That’s, in effect, is what Paul is saying in Galatians, chapter 2. In fact, he said I divided with Peter when it became necessary. I divided with Barnabas when it became necessary. I divided with the Judaizers because it was absolutely essential. Doctrine divides. And the Church today is afraid of doctrine because they want unity at any cost.

In that connection, we say the leaders have a special God-given responsibility to be sure that the doctrine is pure and true. The Church must be agreed on the truth of the gospel. And we’ve allowed our concern over political and ethical and moral issues to blur our focus on the essential truth of the gospel, the truth of the word of God. And pastors and elders are obligated before God to sort through these issues very carefully, to examine the details of the doctrine very carefully, and then to lead the Church on a path that is doctrinally pure and correct. And the abdicating of that responsibility in a wholesale way by pastors and elders, leaders today, resulting in a church that is running every which way and is caught up with success, caught up with the needs of the hour and moral condition and the ethical problems and the political chaos, they’ve lost they’re focus on what is the truth of the gospel and what is the ministry of the Church. And the gospel is of such crucial importance because it is the salvation that God has provided.

“I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is power of God for salvation to everyone who believes.” The salvation of God in Christ is at stake. We cannot dally around as if it is something that we can work out over time. It must be worked out now. And we can go along no further together until it is resolved. And that’s the attitude and position that Paul and the other apostles will take with him. And it will create division. It creates conflict. And that conflicts hounds Paul’s ministry until his death. It didn’t get resolved in Acts 15 in the sense that it went away. The purity of the gospel was settled and clearly declared at this conference, but now, years later, Paul has to write to the Galatians and remind them again of the issues at stake. So we must be willing to remain firm and true over time to the truth that has been revealed.

Let’s pray together: Thank you, God, for the faithfulness of Paul, of these apostles that met together under great pressure, times of persecution and suffering, to deal with issues that would divide the Church. Thank you, Lord, for your grace to give them the courage to stand for the purity of the gospel so that that gospel might be passed to the next generation, the next generation, so that we today might have that gospel, your power, that we might believe and experience your salvation. Lord, may we, as your people today, have that same commitment to the truth of the gospel, to maintaining it’s purity as is evidenced in these New Testament apostles. And may it be, so that others might come to the salvation that has been provided by the Savior who has loved us and died for us. We pray in His name, amen.