Galatians One
1:1-5 Paul works hard, from the first words through
2:10, to establish that his gospel is independent of any and every human source
or authority. His gospel depends on none
but the Lord.
When we face conflict, there is ever the need to second-guess
potential stabs that our opponents may make against us. Paul must present himself in full
independence, lest any opponent should try to claim Jerusalem as the pinnacle
and highest office of Christian authority, and then attempt to show that Paul
is not on the same page with that authority.
That would pin upon Paul the responsibility to own the fault and to make
the correction. Contrary to this (and
even before it is said, though Paul probably heard this attack before), Paul
insists that his message and his apostleship derive from the highest authority,
an authority at the very least equal to that of Jerusalem and her apostles. Thus, Paul will claim a backing that cannot
be surpassed even by those who impressively may claim as credential the
experience of walking with Jesus during His Messianic ministry.
Paul thus credentials himself and also provides the briefest summary
of the gospel he preaches, regarding “our
Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us out
of this present evil world, according to the will of our God and Father: to
whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen” (1:3-5).
This bare skeleton of a sermon-outline will be fleshed out in the
remainder of the epistle and it reminds us of the similar opening to Romans and
its gospel summary: “the gospel of
God, which he promised afore through his prophets in the holy scriptures, concerning
his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was
declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness,
by the resurrection from the dead; even Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we
received grace and apostleship, unto obedience of faith among all the nations,
for his name's sake” (Romans 1:1-6).
1:6-9 Typical format for letters and epistles would
call for a “thanksgiving” section to follow the brief “to” and “from” of the
introduction. A reader would anticipate
it, expecting the writer to express personal appreciation, perhaps including a
prayer for his/her blessing. Such
expressions allow the writer and the reader to bond together before sharing the
message to follow. The reader of
Galatians would be jolted not only by the omission of this intimate expression,
but by the harsh expression that follows.
Paul is quite deliberately communicating that the situation that prompts
him to write is an emergency containing a great threat.
Paul warns of a “different gospel” and pronounces a dire curse on
anyone behind it. He denies anyone the
possibility of claiming a simple miscommunication by insisting that the gospel
which he (and his associates) had “preached” is identical to the one which the
Galatians “heard.” Paul spoke plainly
and they heard clearly. There was not
more than a single message between them, as though one could claim that some “different
gospel” was one of the possible interpretations of Paul’s message. The curse applied even if the messenger were
an angel (the words “preacher, apostle, and angel” all basically mean “a
messenger”). Curiously, Paul recalls
being initially received in Galatia as though he himself were an angel (4:14).
The curse is the Greek word “anathema” which is the word
applied in the Greek Old Testament (the Septuagint) to describe items placed “under
the ban.” When Israel’s armies were
victorious, God directed the disposition of the spoils and booty taken in
battle. This might include physical
wealth (gold and silver), livestock, or human captives. Sometimes this could be kept for the benefit
and enjoyment of the Israelites. Other
times, some (or all) of the take would be placed “under the ban”, under anathema. In such cases, anything and everything “under
the ban” had to be utterly destroyed. It
was forbidden for God’s people to touch or to keep it, and at times those who
fell to the temptation by keeping “banned” items were destroyed themselves. When Paul pronounces a curse, it portends
destruction from God.
We are not yet told what the “different gospel” might be, only that
its acceptance marks a turning from grace.
This so-called gospel will be pieced together from the various objects
against which Paul argues in the rest of the letter. Suffice it to say that the issue surfaces in
the refusal of Jewish Christians to socially eat with their Gentile brothers
and sisters. This should be our starting
point, and I hasten to add that nothing in Galatians suggests the traditional “Lutheran”
striving of grace against legalistic self-righteousness. That was Luther’s issue; not Paul’s. And all of us who have fallen under Luther’s
long shadow must resist and replace that theology with the one that Paul
presents. They are not the same. Even so, the Lutheran angle has become the
dominant understanding in Protestant churches generally, and even within churches
of Christ. Once accepted, it is
difficult to shake, yet the effort is worth it because the real concerns are
more meaningful.
1:10-24 Paul returns to claims for the independence
of his gospel. He has made the assertion
in the opening lines, and now he will substantiate his claims with
evidence. What follows is a sketch of
Paul’s personal history over about two decades.
He speaks of where he went and of whom he met, but the telling is truly
meant to showcase where he did not go and with whom he did not meet. Specifically, over 17 years Paul made only
one visit to Jerusalem, in which he spent just 15 days with Peter (in
Galatians, he is referred to by his Hebrew name, Cephas) and also with James. You might say, in response to those who would
try to anchor Paul and his message as offshoots from “Jerusalem University”,
that Paul made only one visit that was much shorter than a single
semester. It would be ludicrous to think
that Paul received his apostolic education at this time, and so it must derive
from some other source.
This James is not the apostle who bore that name (one of the “sons
of thunder”), but the physical brother of Jesus, another son of Mary and
(probably also) of Joseph. James and
another brother, Jude, have epistles in the NT.
James rose to leadership prominence in the Jerusalem church. And he was regarded as an “apostle” (=
messenger), which is not to say he was regarded as one of the Twelve. We might wonder how contemporaries might have
viewed the comparative authority of James against Paul? Paul would source his message to a “revelation”,
probably his Damascus Road encounter that led to his conversion from Saul the
Pharisee to Paul the Apostle. We can
only wonder what James might have claimed to substantiate his own
authority. Did Jesus give him a personal
commission? We simply do not know. Whatever the case, James was esteemed as a leader
by the Jewish Christians who shared fellowship with him in the original
Christian church: Jerusalem.
Paul begins his history with his pre-Christian past, when he was a
persecutor of the church. He never hesitates
to identify himself with what had to be his most embarrassing life experience,
using it to ground his own humility and to embrace his acceptance by Jesus as a
true experience of grace. Curiously, he
traces his apostolic back before this even to pre-birth. It is almost as if God sent Paul through the
rigors of Judaism (and Paul advanced and excelled beyond many of his peers) and
through events of persecution, like the martyrdom of Stephen, and God used all
of this to shape the man who would be best-qualified as His apostle to the Gentiles. In retrospection, Paul could virtually say, “I
was born to be an apostle!”
Not only did Paul not visit Jerusalem until three years had passed,
even before this visit he was preaching the gospel that he had received by
revelation. In this time he went to
Damascus (toward which he was traveling when Jesus confronted and converted
him) and also to Arabia. Some identify
Arabia with an area north of Israel, but the only other mention of Arabia by
Paul is in Gal. 4:25, the site of Mount Sinai.
N. T. Wright suggested in an article in the Journal of Biblical
Literature that Paul went to Sinai as Elijah had, under duress from difficult
ministry and seeking a revelation from God, but this is largely
conjecture. We know little of Paul’s
life during this time.
Then after the brief Jerusalem visit, Paul goes to Syria and Cilicia. Cilicia is the region in which we find Paul’s
hometown, Tarsus. In Acts, this is where
Paul is when Barnabas seeks him out and brings him to the church in Antioch,
Syria (there is another place called Antioch in Pisidia). The church in Antioch is famous not only as
the place where Christians were first called “Christians”, but also as the
first church to combine Jewish and Gentile Christians in a common
fellowship. Barnabas was sent by the
Jerusalem authorities to investigate and send a report on this unusual and (to
some) potentially threatening situation.
Fortunately, the “son of encouragement” was thrilled by what he saw, and
he eagerly sought out “Saul” to join him there.
We can well imagine the way Antioch offered a properly formative
experience for one who would come to be known as “the apostle to the Gentiles”
and who fought strong opposition to make sure history generated only one church
rather than two (one Gentile and the other Christian).
Far from being an accepted alumni of Jerusalem, Paul ends this
portion of his history by noting his facial anonymity among the churches of
Judea (=Israel). Literally, he was “unknown
by face” (we will note in Ch. 2 that Paul makes repeated remarks around the
word “face”).
Paul will continue his personal history in the next chapter, but
all of this is brewing up to a conflict that will rope in Paul, with Peter,
with James. Perhaps we should release
the naïve altruism that expects church to be a conflict-free zone (and, to
benefit some, I must add that this is not a call to ratchet up the conflict for
conflict’s sake). Jesus (the Prince of
Peace) could not escape conflict; nor could His apostles, nor could the early
church, nor—for that matter—has any church in history. All meaningful relationships conflict, and
the result is often benefit even if achieved after considerable pain. It is curious that the conflict showcased in
Galatians authors who together are responsible for writing 16 (Paul has 13;
Peter 2, and James just one) of the 27 NT books! For those occasions on which conflict cannot
be responsibly avoided, perhaps we can learn from Galatians how to conflict as
spiritual people.
