Threats to the Gospel - Part One

There are some parts of the Bible which are theologically difficult. There are other parts which are historically difficult. Still others are hard to understand because of their grammar—their linguistic structure is difficult.

I want you to know that the passage we have before us today is all three: it is theologically difficult, historically difficult, and grammatically difficult. So we’re really going to have to rely on the Holy Spirit to help us understand it.

Please take the study notes which you’ll find in the bulletin today and turn to the side which deals with the Chronology of Paul’s Early Career. You have to understand that many of these dates are approximate. They are our best estimate of when these things happened in Paul’s life based on the biblical evidence we have.

Now you’ll notice on this chart that I have highlighted three visits that Paul made to Jerusalem after he became a Christian. He met Jesus Christ on the road to Damascus and spent the next three years in Arabia and Damascus. He then tells us in Galatians 1:18 that…

after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter and stayed with him fifteen days. I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother.

So that was his first visit in 38 AD. Following that visit, he spent the next several years in Cilicia and Syria, and was personally unknown to the churches in Judea, as he tells us in Gal. 1:22.

Meanwhile, the church in Jerusalem sent Barnabas to check out the situation in the city of Antioch, which was about 290 mi. north of Jerusalem. A new church was growing there, made up mainly of Gentile converts, and the apostles in Jerusalem wanted him to check it out. When Barnabas got there, he was encouraged by what he saw, and so he sent for Paul, who was living in Tarsus, to come and join him and help teach these new Christians. That’s how Paul came to Antioch.

Shortly afterward, in about the year 44 A.D., we read in Acts 11:27ff…

During this time some prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. One of them, named Agabus, stood up and through the Spirit predicted that a severe famine would spread over the entire Roman world. (This happened during the reign of Claudius.) The disciples, each according to his ability, decided to provide help for the brothers living in Judea. This they did, sending their gift to the elders by Barnabas and Saul.

This marked Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem as a Christian—he went there to bring famine relief from the Christians in Antioch.

(Incidentally, do you remember that tomb I was telling you I had visited last Sunday morning? That tomb was built by Queen Helen of Adiabene—a Gentile woman who had converted to Judaism. The historian Josephus tells us that she also sent famine relief to Jerusalem at this very same time.)

After Paul and Barnabas delivered this gift, they went back to Antioch, and pretty soon went on their first missionary journey to Asia Minor. And it was during that journey that they planted churches in the region of Galatia. The new Christians there were mainly Gentiles.

The influx of all these new Gentile Christians created a major theological problem in the church. You remember that the original converts to Christianity in Jerusalem were Jews. And many of them, while being followers of Jesus, still had a very high regard for the traditions of Judaism. They still went to the Temple to worship, they still observed the Jewish holidays and rituals, they still practiced circumcision, and so forth.

And some of them began to insist that the Gentiles ought to do the same. In fact, they went so far as to say that if the Gentiles did not do these things—if they did not adopt the Jewish Law and all of its regulations—they could not really be Christians. And this group began to send out delegations to all the Gentile churches that Paul had planted to straighten them out on this issue.

Well that was a very disturbing development for two reasons:

1. It cast doubt on the content of the Gospel. Was the Gospel a message of new life in Christ solely on the basis of God’s grace? Or did our standing before God depend in some way on our performing up to a certain set of standards? That was the heart of the theological issue, and it was the main reason that Paul wrote this letter to the Galatians. Because this controversy cast doubt on the content of the Gospel.

2. It also cast doubt on Paul himself as a communicator of the Gospel. The Judaizers were saying to the Gentiles that Paul hadn’t given them the whole scoop. He hadn’t given them the “full gospel”. He had left out the part about the Jewish Law.

And the Judaizers were claiming that their perspective was the authoritative perspective because they were from Jerusalem, and that was where the real authority lay. Because that is where all the original apostles were—Peter, James, John, etc. The Jerusalem church was the “mother” church.

As far as being an apostle, this fellow Paul was a Johnny-come-lately. The Judaizers implied that he probably got his license to preach from the other apostles in Jerusalem. So everyone had better take Paul’s gospel with a grain of salt. It wasn’t as authoritative as it should have been.

And Paul wrote this letter, in part, to correct that notion. He wanted the Galatians to know that he had received his commission to be an apostle directly from the risen Lord Jesus Christ, just as he says in the very first verse of this letter. He hadn’t gone to school in Jerusalem to learn how to be an apostle. He hadn’t received his license to preach, or his commission, from the other apostles.

In fact, he had barely even been in Jerusalem since becoming a Christian. But he had been active all those years as an apostle, teaching and preaching the Gospel he had received from Jesus Christ, as he says in chapter 1, verse 12.

Now the historical problem in this passage comes up in verse 1 of chapter 2. He says…

Fourteen years later I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. I went in response to a revelation and set before them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. But I did this privately to those who seemed to be leaders, for fear that I was running or had run my race in vain.

Now when was that? Fourteen years after what? His conversion? Or his first visit to Jerusalem three years after his conversion?

Many scholars believe that Paul means 14 years after his conversion, which would mean about 49–50 AD—as you’ll see on your Chronology. And they believe that Paul went to Jerusalem—and this would be his third visit—in order to attend the Jerusalem Council, which is described in Acts 15.

The Jerusalem Council was a major, public meeting of the church to settle this question about the Gentiles and the Jewish Law once and for all. Now we don’t have time to read all about it in Acts 15, but to make a long story short, Paul was totally vindicated at that meeting. The leaders of the church—the other apostles and elders—all agreed that the Gentiles were not required to observe the Jewish Law.

Now my question is this: If this third visit to Jerusalem to attend the Jerusalem Council is what Paul is referring to here in Galatians 2:1, then why doesn’t he say anything in the rest of the letter about the results of the council? Why doesn’t he tell the Galatians that, hey, the whole church agreed at that council that you Gentiles don’t have to observe the Jewish Law? That would settle everything. Case closed. Argument ended.

I’ll tell you why he doesn’t do that. It’s because the council hadn’t happened yet. He wrote to this letter to the Galatians before the Jerusalem Council ever took place.

But that leaves us with the problem of the “fourteen years later”. When was this visit that he refers to in 2:1 if it wasn’t 14 years after his conversion?

Well, interestingly enough, he uses a Greek word that is different from the one that he used in 1:18 where he said “after three years”. There he used the word “meta”, which means “after”; but here in 2:1, he uses the word “dia”, which can mean “during”. In other words, this verse could be translated “during the course of 14 years—during the last 14 years that I’ve been a Christian—I went up again to Jerusalem.”

So that means that he would be referring here to Visit #2—the famine relief visit. Now he says here that he went to Jerusalem in response to a revelation. And we usually assume that that revelation was a private thing and had something to do with his doubts and questions about his ministry. But if you look back at Acts 11:27, you’ll find out what it really was.

Acts 11 tells us that Agabus, a prophet, came to Antioch and, by a revelation given to him by the Holy Spirit, predicted that there would be a famine throughout the whole Roman Empire. And it was in response to that revelation that Paul and Barnabas and Titus went to Jerusalem on the famine relief project.

But while they were there, Paul took advantage of the opportunity to meet privately with the leaders of the Jerusalem church to discuss his fears about his ministry. He says in v. 2 “for fear that I was running or had run my race in vain.” Now what exactly was he afraid of?

Was he afraid that he had misunderstood the Gospel he had received from the Lord? Was he afraid that he might have somehow garbled it or miscommunicated it in his preaching? No. That is not what he was afraid of.

He was afraid that, if the church in Jerusalem was going to adopt the position that the Jewish Law was essential to the salvation of the Gentiles, then he was wasting his time preaching a gospel of grace. The whole gospel mission would collapse—and the Christian church would die—if its central message ever became anything other than salvation by grace through faith.

You see, there is some reason to believe that Paul’s confidence in the other apostles was a little shaky at this point. He seemed to sense that they might be ready to crack under the pressure of the Judaizers in Jerusalem—the relentless pressure to make the Gospel something other than what it is—a message of free grace from God.

You have to remember that the Jerusalem church was full of people who had come out of a background of strict, orthodox Judaism. To them, law-keeping was a way of life. The book of Acts tells us that even many priests had become Christians. And Paul tells us down in verse 12 that there was an especially strict group that seems to have gathered around James, the brother of Jesus.

So the pressure to subtly alter the Gospel message must have been very intense on the leaders of the church in Jerusalem.

And yet, Paul says in verse 3 that, as a result of his meeting with the Jerusalem leaders, “not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek.” The Jerusalem leaders agreed that the Gentiles didn’t have to adopt the practices and rituals of Judaism in order to be real, genuine Christians.

So that’s what this private consultation in Jerusalem was all about—the continuing purity and integrity of the Gospel message. There was no place in the Gospel for legalism. Look at why this all came about. Paul describes it in verse 4…

This matter arose because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.

The expression “false brothers” is actually one word in Greek—”pseudadelphous”. It’s made up of two words “pseudo”, which means false, or imitation; and “adelphos”, which means brother.

Now these false brothers “infiltrated our ranks”, Paul says. He’s using a military metaphor. I’m sure that Paul was familiar with the ancient Greek tale of the Trojan Horse. In fact, Galatia was located not too far from the ancient city of Troy, so I’m sure the people living there would have been familiar with the story. Perhaps you remember it…

After ten years of war, the Greeks had given up all hope of capturing the city of Troy. So they struck camp one night and departed in apparent defeat, leaving behind only the gigantic carved image of a horse. The next morning when the Trojans awoke, they rejoiced to see that their enemies had gone, and that they had apparently left behind a rather large and impressive gift. They dragged the horse into the city and celebrated their victory.

That night, the Greek soldiers who were hiding in the horse emerged and threw open the gates to the city. The Greek army, which had returned, marched in, and the city of Troy was doomed. All because the enemy had succeeded in infiltrating the city.

Paul is saying here that the church can likewise be infiltrated—infiltrated by people who look like Christians, and sound like Christians—by who are in reality “false brothers”. The message they stand for is not a message of salvation by grace. Their brotherhood is a “brotherhood of works”.

And their purpose is to spy on the freedom we have in Christ—the expression means to gather information for the purpose of destroying someone, just as the KGB spied on the United States during the Cold War. Their intention is to make us slaves—slaves to a legalistic, performance-based, self-righteous way of life.

I want you to appreciate that the danger that was facing Paul and the Galatians is a very real danger that we face today. There are in Christian circles elements who are actively seeking to take you away from the gospel of grace.

They want to persuade you to think of yourself as a Christian and to seek out fellowship with other Christians on the basis of other things—on the basis of

• what particular political party you might support

• or what position you might have on certain “key” issues, whether they be

- social issues like abortion or school prayer or welfare

- issues of personal conviction, such as whether or not you boycott certain businesses, or what style of music you play in church

- theological issues such as the signs and wonders movement, or your position on Bible prophecy, or even what particular version of the Bible you use.

They want to try to insinuate these things into the Gospel—to make them a part of the Gospel—the same way that the Greeks got the Trojan Horse into the gates of Troy. And they want to make these things the litmus test of your Christianity—something in addition to salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. And if that infiltration succeeds, it leads to slavery.

That’s why Paul tells us “I refused to give in to them for even a moment. I refused to define the gospel on the basis of these things.” Because he knew that the purity and the integrity of the Gospel message was at stake.

We stand in God’s favor on the basis of what he graciously did for us in Christ; not on the basis of where we stand on any issue, or what political party we support, or what denomination we happen to belong, or how well we measure up to any standard—even if that standard happens to be the OT Law.

We come to God through the blood of Jesus Christ and no other way. And that blood is a gift of his grace.

Paul goes on in the rest of this passage to say that, once this issue became clear, the leaders of the church at Jerusalem confirmed his ministry. They gave him the right hand of fellowship. They “saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles” (v. 7). They realized that “God, was at work in my ministry” (v. 8)

“They recognized the grace given to me.” (v. 9). And “they agreed that we should keep doing what we had been doing all along—going to the Gentiles—preaching the Gospel of grace to them”.

The outcome of this meeting of the apostles was true fellowship—a unity of purpose that only the Gospel of grace can bring. When you try to set up other definitions of what it means to be a Christian, you don’t end up with fellowship: you end up with division, and fighting, and arguing. And the church ends up split and ineffective and unattractive in the eyes of the world.

Brothers and sisters, let us not let that happen to us! May our fellowship be a fellowship of the Cross. May we accept each other and love each other because of the Cross, and for no other reason.