Secrets. They don’t make friends, but friends do make them; or so the
saying goes. It is interesting, therefore, to note what Jesus said to the
disciples in John 15:15. “I do not call you slaves
anymore, because a slave doesn’t know what his master is doing. I have called
you friends, because I have made known to you everything I have heard from My
Father.” Jesus didn’t keep secrets
from His friends. Jesus wanted his friends to be in on His business. So when Paul
twice uses the Greek word transliterated “apocalypse” in Galatians 1:11-24, he
wants to show that he was one of Jesus’ friends as well, and that Jesus
revealed secrets to him also. The secret that is the point of this passage is
the content of the gospel.
Galatians 1:11-24 says, “Now I want you to know,
brothers, that the gospel preached by me is not based on human thought.
For I did not receive it from a human source and I was not taught it, but
it came by a revelation from Jesus Christ. For you have heard about my
former way of life in Judaism: I persecuted God’s church to an extreme degree
and tried to destroy it. I advanced in Judaism beyond many contemporaries
among my people, because I was extremely zealous for the traditions of my
ancestors. But when God, who from my birth set me apart and called me by
His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son in me, so that I could preach
Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone. I did
not go up to Jerusalem to those who had become apostles before me; instead I
went to Arabia and came back to Damascus. Then after three years I did go
up to Jerusalem to get to know Cephas, and I stayed with him 15 days. But
I didn’t see any of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.
Now I am not lying in what I write to you. God is my witness.
Afterward, I went to the regions of Syria and Cilicia. I remained
personally unknown to the Judean churches in Christ; they simply kept
hearing: ‘He
who formerly persecuted us now preaches the faith he once tried to destroy.’ And they glorified
God because of me.”
Paul’s goal here is to make perfectly clear that he did not receive his
gospel from man. As such, his goal in all of this is to show that he isn’t out
to please people. I find R. Alan Cole’s outline of the book particularly
helpful at this point: “I. argument from experience (1:1-2:21); II. argument
from theology (3:1-5:1); III. argument from results (5:2-6:10).”[1] And thus, we find ourselves
in the epicenter of the argument from experience. And lest anyone try to say,
“We can’t trust experience; experiences can vary, but God stays the same; so we
must look to God alone as revealed in His Word,” I would ask what the point of
a Christian testimony is then. That’s all Paul does here. He explains life
before Christ, life as he met Christ, and life after and with Christ.
Verses 13-14 are Paul’s statement regarding life prior to Christ. They
read, “For you have heard about my former way of life in Judaism: I persecuted
God’s church to an extreme degree and tried to destroy it. I advanced in
Judaism beyond many contemporaries among my people, because I was extremely
zealous for the traditions of my ancestors.” Two things are clear in these
verses about Paul’s past. Two things are
what he reflected on more than anything else about his past. First, he was a
violent persecutor of the church. Second, he was a champion of Jewish theology
and practice.
The first thing that came to Paul’s mind regarding his past was his
sinfulness. He was ashamed of the fact that he had harmed the church, the same
church that he was now a part of. As believers (at least this is true in my
case) we are quick to remember our sins. It might not necessarily be a problem
(as Paul goes on to contrast this with the great grace of God), but it does say
a lot about where our focus is. Does my focus on my sin lead to praising God
for His grace, or does it lead to condemning myself for mistakes? If the
latter, I need to repent and turn my gaze back on Christ.
For free: if you don’t yet know the Lord, I would urge you to reflect on
your past. What are you doing these days that could be seriously harming a member of the
body of Christ, or even a future member of the body of Christ (maybe you even
are already a member of the body of Christ )? If you turned to Christ, or if
that person turned to Christ, how would you feel about the way you’ve been
treating them? Paul here feels intense remorse. He was actively persecuting the
church and destroying it. In another passage it says,
In
fact, I myself supposed it was necessary to do many things in opposition to the
name of Jesus the Nazarene. I actually did this in Jerusalem, and I locked
up many of the saints in prison, since I had received authority for that from
the chief priests. When they were put to death, I cast my vote against them. In
all the synagogues I often tried to make them blaspheme by punishing them. I
even pursued them to foreign cities since I was greatly enraged at them (Acts
26:9-11).
And
in another place he says, “Being zealous for God, just as all of you are today,
I persecuted this Way to the death, binding and putting both men and women in
jail, as both the high priest and the whole council of elders can testify about
me. After I received letters from them to the brothers, I traveled to Damascus
to bring those who were prisoners there to be punished in Jerusalem” (Acts
22:3b-5). Paul calls himself the chief of sinners (cf. 1 Timothy 1:15) because
his life prior to Christ severely rocked him. I guarantee that not a day went
by that he didn’t regret his actions against his brothers and sisters in
Christ. So, my plea today is to think about others. If your life was
dramatically changed, or even if someone else’s life was dramatically changed,
would there be things that you would regret about your life beforehand? If so,
cast them aside and don’t give Satan any more ammunition to use in accusing
your soul.
And speaking of Paul’s former zealousy for God leads to the second main
point of his life before Christ. He was advancing ahead of all his
contemporaries and was more zealous for his ancestor’s traditions than anyone
else. I’m sure he saw this partly as playing into the previous point, because
his zeal for God led him to want to keep Judaism pure, and in his unconverted
mind, Christianity was a pollution of Judaism. But at the same time it shows
his zeal for the law. He was all about the law. Philippians 3:4b-6 would expand
on this at a later time: “If anyone else thinks he has grounds for confidence
in the flesh, I have more: circumcised the eighth day; of the nation of Israel,
of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; regarding the law, a Pharisee; regarding
zeal, persecuting the church; regarding the righteousness that is in the law,
blameless.” It’s the circumcision point that will come up later in this letter,
possibly one reason why he leaves that accomplishment collection out of this
letter.
Paul’s point is that there is no way he made up this gospel that he
preaches. He was too schooled in the law and too violent against Christians for
him to join them on his own. So then he explains the divine intervention that
occurred, that he initially introduced in verse 12. “For I did not receive it
from a human source and I was not taught it, but it came by a revelation from
Jesus Christ.”
Verses 15-16a are Paul’s statement regarding his conversion. They read,
“But when God, who from my birth set me apart and called me by His grace, was
pleased to reveal His Son in me, so that I could preach Him among the
Gentiles.” Paul is so adamant about the fact that his gospel is not from
humans, or based on human merit that the subject of this passage is God.[2] Paul is the object. It’s very
clear in the Greek as well. “The one who set me apart” is in the nominative
case which means subject, or “the one performing the action.” “Me” is in the
accusative case and is the object, or “the one who receives the action.”
God set Paul apart from his birth (if not before, cf. Ephesians 1:3-5).
This means that before Paul had ever done anything good or bad, God had decided
to set him apart for His work. The Greek word for “set apart” in this verse
implies a setting apart for a specific use, which will come at the very end of
16a. Paul definitely highlights the grace of God when he says, “and called me
by His grace,” because by the time Jesus called to him on the Damascus road
Paul sees the reality that technically he could have forfeited the fact that
God had set him apart. However, the grace of God is shown in that all those He
set apart will be called, justified, sanctified, and glorified (cf.
Romans 8:28-39). There is no “what if” in God’s sovereignty over salvation.
Grace cannot and will not be forfeited.
God called Paul through the revealing of Jesus to him. Not only was Paul
called through this revelation of Jesus Christ, but he was also given his
gospel at the same time (cf. 1:12). Jesus was revealed to Paul because God
wanted to reveal Jesus to Paul. Paul didn’t deserve to have Jesus revealed to
him, just like you and I don’t deserve to have Jesus revealed to us. When Jesus
was revealed to Paul, He gave Paul a commission to service, described to
Ananias, the one who restored his sight, “Go! For this man
is My chosen instrument to take My name to Gentiles, kings, and the Israelites.
I will show him how much he must suffer for My name!” (Acts 9:15-16). In the same way, every believer
is called to be on mission for God. When was the last time you spoke to someone
about spiritual matters?
But again, it is important to reiterate that Paul nowhere had anyone
explain Jesus to him. Jesus revealed Himself to him and that was the source of
Paul’s gospel. It will be even more clearly proved in the next 8 verses.
Verses 16b-24 are Paul’s statement regarding life after conversion. They
read, “I did not immediately consult with anyone. I did not go up to
Jerusalem to those who had become apostles before me; instead I went to Arabia
and came back to Damascus. Then after three years I did go up to
Jerusalem to get to know Cephas, and I stayed with him 15 days. But I
didn’t see any of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.
Now I am not lying in what I write to you. God is my witness.
Afterward, I went to the regions of Syria and Cilicia. I remained
personally unknown to the Judean churches in Christ; they simply kept
hearing: ‘He who formerly persecuted us now preaches the faith he once tried to
destroy.’ And they glorified God because of me.”
Paul here explains some things that are vastly different from what we
read in the book of Acts. Hopefully, by the time I’ve finished explaining it,
you will see that they don’t contradict. In fact, I hope you’ll see that Paul’s
story in Galatians is unique from any other Christian’s experience. Paul here
writes that he didn’t consult with anyone after meeting Jesus, which on face
value seems to directly contradict Acts 9:19b-20: “Saul
was with the disciples in Damascus for some days. Immediately he began
proclaiming Jesus in the synagogues: ‘He is the Son of God’.” However, what does Galatians say?
Paul simply writes here that he did not go up to Jerusalem to confer
with the other apostles, but instead went to Arabia, and then came back to
Damascus for three years. It’s safe to say that Paul travelled to Arabia
between Acts 9:19a and 19b, and then stayed with the disciples in Damascus for
three years.
Now before explaining anything (purely conjecturally) about Paul’s time
in Arabia, it is important to make a point. There is a difference between Paul’s
situation and ours. We can’t look at Paul here after we are saved and say, “I
don’t need to go join a fellowship of believers.” Paul is making the point in
Galatians that his gospel was purely from Christ and there was nothing that
could have polluted it. In Acts, Luke is making the point that just like all
believers should, Paul himself was part of a fellowship of faith. There is no
contradiction, just a difference of emphasis. So please, if you haven’t
already, join a church! You aren’t Paul. The canon of Scripture is closed. You need to fellowship with other believers, love them, and study the Word!
Arabia. Why does Paul go to Arabia? Since Arabia only occurs in the New
Testament here and in 4:25, the only time we here about Paul’s trip to Arabia
is right here in 1:17. So everything we can offer about what happened while he was there is pure conjecture. Some points seem to make sense though, and I will
share them here.
In the
second occurrence [of the word], Paul associated Arabia with the giving of the
Mosaic law at Mount Sinai (Gal. 4:25). In an epistle where the law is depicted
negatively with regard to justification and sanctification, it is natural to
read 1:17 as colored by these themes. While not denying the apostle’s
geographical movement from Damascus to Arabia and back, the impression is that
Paul wanted believers to read that movement as part of his spiritual journey as
well. In other words Paul united Arabia and Mount Sinai geographically in order
to unite them theologically also. Shortly after Paul’s conversion he departed
(“I departed, withdrew”) from Damascus (the place of grace and faith) to Arabia
(the place of law). But he came back (“I returned once again”) to Damascus (the
place of grace and faith). Paul wanted the Galatians to follow his example and
return to grace and faith and away from their law-centered living.[3]
It
is an interesting viewpoint, and it sheds important light on the debate over
Romans 7 (pre- or post-conversion Paul), and while it would say, “Paul didn’t
live a miraculous Christian life, he struggled with legalistic tendencies just
like we do today even after salvation,” it need not necessarily mean that.
J. B. Lightfoot explains,
Standing on the threshold of
the new covenant, he was anxious to look upon the birthplace of the old, that,
dwelling for a while in seclusion in the presence of " the mount that
burned with fire," he might ponder over the transient glories of the
" ministration of death," and apprehend its real purpose in relation
to the more glorious covenant which was now to supplant it. Here, surrounded by
the children of the desert, the descendants of Hagar the bondwoman, he read the
true meaning and power of the law. In the rugged and barren region whence it
issued he saw a fit type of that bleak desolation which it created, and was
intended to create, in the soul of man.[4]
So
while some would argue that Paul’s time in Arabia is supposed to be a symbolic
way of saying that for a time he fell into a form of legalistic Christianity,
others would say that his time in Arabia was literal and it was a time of
meditation on the new task he’d been charged with. I have my doubts about
supposing that Paul had a legalistic stint as a Christian, especially if it is
Paul trying to find common ground with his readers, as the first quote above
suggests. There is nothing in his tone throughout this letter that would indicate
that he wants to say, “I’ve been where you are, but I got out; now it’s your
turn.” The whole tone of his message in this book is, “Why are you so foolish?”
So Paul travelled to Arabia literally, and likely was reminded of the
powerlessness of the law to give life, which would be why he brings it up here.
But again, this is all conjecture.
Paul then says in verses 18-20 that after three years in Damascus he
finally went to Jerusalem and spent about two weeks with Peter, and also saw
James, the brother of Jesus, while there. He makes it clear that this is the
truth, that there was no one else he saw during this time, and the fact that he
was only there for fifteen days would go to show that his three year theology
foundation wouldn’t have been greatly shaken in such a short time period. Even
in visiting other church leaders after three years didn’t change the fact that
Paul received his gospel from Jesus alone. He even makes it clear that the
point of his time there was “to get to know Peter.” He wasn’t going there to
share his beliefs (cf. 2:1-2), but simply to make a new friend. His gospel, the
one Christ gave to him, was not corrupted by men at any point.
Then Paul concludes his point of not being influenced by men by writing
verses 21-24. He went away into Syria and Cilicia for fourteen years (cf. 2:1).Cilicia
was a region more than 300 miles removed from Jerusalem, and also was the region
in which Tarsus—Paul’s hometown—was located. (Maybe his first step, post-three
years in Damascus, was to evangelize his own family and friends.) The region of
Syria began about 100 miles north of Jerusalem and stretched another 200 miles
before bordering Cilicia. So when Paul says, “I remained personally unknown to
the Judean churches,” he isn’t lying. His first trip to Jerusalem was solely for the
purpose of visiting Peter, and he stayed away from the churches. However, news
of his transformation spread quickly. The man who had persecuted the church was
now preaching the faith he had tried to destroy.
And lest anyone think that Paul preached a different gospel than the
other apostles and early Christians, think again. What gospel did Paul preach?
It was the same one that he had tried to destroy before. The one Stephen
preached in Acts 7 was the one Paul preached as well. So while Paul didn’t get
his gospel from men, he did get it from Jesus, the same One who gave Peter and
James and John their gospels. Jesus is consistent enough to give everyone the
same gospel; to say He gave Paul something different would be to say that Jesus
doesn’t believe in His people being unified, which would go against John 17,
and would mean that Jesus prayed for things He wouldn’t even work to achieve Himself, which
would mean that Jesus didn’t say what He meant, which would mean that He was a
liar and a deceiver, which would mean that He wasn’t sinless and couldn’t die
for our sins. So, when Paul says in verse 12 that he received his gospel
through a revelation of Jesus Christ, it is clear that Paul preached the exact
same message that Peter and James and John preached, but maybe I’m getting
ahead of myself. The proof of this will come in the next post.
Paul concludes this point by saying that the people who heard about him
praised God because of him. This was his life goal. He didn’t want the praise
for his transformation; that praise went to God alone. Galatians 1:5 says that
it is to God that the glory belongs forever. This was Paul’s motto, and should
be ours as well. What is your reason for wanting physically visible spiritual
transformation in your life? Is it so you can pat yourself on the back? Is it
so that others will pat you on the back? Or is it so that God will be seen as
the gracious, glorious, powerful God that He is? Only the last option is
viable. Let it be the story of your life. If our primary goal isn’t glorifying
and pleasing God, we will never rightly relate to people; Paul glorified God
with his life and was able to impact all of Christianity for almost two millennia
to follow. Let’s do the same.
Til next time.
Soli Deo
Gloria
[1] R.
Alan Cole, Galatians, Tyndale New Testament Commentary Series (IVP,
1989).
[2] I
know there’s a variant here, but the fact that the “one who called [him] by His
grace was pleased to reveal His Son in [him]” proves that the one who
called him was God the Father. So whether God is included or not changes
nothing and casts no shadow on the trustworthiness of the text.
[3] John
F. Hart, "Paul as weak in faith in Romans 7:7-25," Bibliotheca
Sacra 170, no. 679 (July 1, 2013): 332-333.
[4] J.
B. Lightfoot, The Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians, 88-89.
No comments:
Post a Comment