All The Saints (part 3)

The fifteenth chapter of Acts, which is often headlined as “The Jerusalem Council,” is predicated on the Gentile question.  The chapter opens with “Now some men came down from Judea and began to teach the brothers, ‘Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.’” (Acts 15:1)  This took place in Antioch, which was a major center of the church.  “When Paul and Barnabas had a major argument and debate with them, the church appointed Paul and Barnabas and some others from among them to go up to meet with the apostles and elders in Jerusalem about this point of disagreement” (15:2). 

Luke goes on to report that “When they arrived in Jerusalem, they were received by the elders, and they reported all the things God had done with them.  But some from the religious party of the Pharisees who had believed,” in Jesus, and therefore were part of the church, “stood up and said, ‘It is necessary to circumcise the Gentiles and to order them to observe the law of Moses.’” (15:4-5)  Effectively, this circumcision and observance of the law of Moses, which would be an adherence to the marks of the covenant as evidence of inclusion in the people of the Creator God, would make these Gentiles into Jews. 

Peter would stand and declare that “some time ago God chose me to preach to the Gentiles so they would hear the message of the Gospel and believe” (15:7b).  It is here worth remembering that the use of “gospel” was not to be disconnected from its use by Rome and by Caesar, as announcements about Caesar (particularly in connection with his cult and his worship) were said to be “gospel.”  It was a term with which all the people of the empire would have been familiar, so the announcement of a “gospel” was not a novelty in the least.  The novelty was that it was being used in reference to Jesus and His kingdom---the new, true King of a new, true kingdom. 

With that in mind then, as it would have been in the minds of his hearers and in the minds of those that would later hear Luke’s account of the church (Acts), Peter continues, saying “God, who knows the heart, has testified to them by giving them the Holy Spirit just as He did to us, and He made no distinction between them and us, cleansing their hearts by faith” (15:8).  This “faith” was the confession of Jesus’ lordship, as demonstrated by the close of his statement, which was “we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way we are” (15:11). 

This was remarkable, in that Peter, as a Jew, was devaluing the marks of the covenant, elevating faith in Jesus, which could only come about by what was considered to be the gracious act of the Creator God via His Spirit (who would believe that a man that was crucified by the Romans was the resurrected Messiah and Lord of all?), as the means by which a person, be it Jew or Gentile, enters in upon the covenant that this God first made with Abraham. 

The point being made, and it is the point upon which Paul would seize with great tenacity, was that Gentiles were to be accepted into the covenant as Gentiles, and that the covenant was being extended to Gentiles, rather than still being limited to those who were Jews by birth or who had become Jews via Judaizing (by circumcision and adoption of the covenant markers). 

Jerusalem & The Justification Of Gentiles (part 2 of 2)

After Peter spoke, “The whole group kept quiet and listened to Barnabas and Paul while they explained all the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them” (15:12).  So here we have the repetitive theme of the power and presence of the Holy Spirit, and therefore confirmation of Gentile justification (covenant inclusion) as indicated by the reporting of miraculous signs and wonders.  Consequently we find that, “After they stopped speaking, James replied, ‘Brothers, listen to me.  Simeon has explained how God first concerned Himself to select from among the Gentiles a people for His name” (15:13-14) and “Therefore I conclude that we should not cause extra difficulty for those among the Gentiles who are turning to God” (15:19). 

With this James stands in solidarity with Paul.  All that is necessary for Gentiles is that they believe the Gospel and so participate in the covenant in equal standing with those who are members of Israel (as indicated by their own covenant markers).  This belief in the Gospel corresponds with the story of Abraham, so all is well.  Unfortunately, he could not leave well-enough alone.  Apparently, the idea of Gentile inclusiveness apart from some form of outward covenant marker was untenable to James and the others in Jerusalem.

Part of Paul’s indictment of Peter in the letter to the Galatians makes mention of James, as it was “Until certain people came from James, he had been eating with the Gentiles” (2:12).  Luke softens this in Acts to “some men came down from Judea” (15:1a).  When we consider that the issue of table fellowship was prominent in Antioch, there is little wonder that James adds “we should write them a letter telling them to abstain from things defiled by idols and from sexual immorality and from what has been strangled and from blood” (15:20).  We should take notice that all of this has to do with food.  We know this because the issue at Antioch sprang from the withdrawal of Jewish believers from table fellowship, with circumcision as a natural follow-on issue, though it was secondary. 

There are not three separate issues here, with two having to do with moral behavior and one having to do with food.  Thinking along such lines pulls us away from the appropriate context and the issues at hand amongst the believers.  The table was where the believing congregation gathered, and because the meal table was of paramount importance for the shaping of societies and communities in the day in which the church first came into existence, so also the church’s meal table was of paramount importance.  We must understand that.  Once we comprehend the community-shaping-and-identifying power of the meal in the Greco-Roman world, we can comfortably come to terms with Paul’s being quite exercised at the way that it being misused in Corinth, and why it is foundational for Paul’s challenge to Peter in Galatians, which sets him off on the path of writing about the nature of justification in that letter.

James is not suggesting that they “abstain from things defiled by idols” and to “abstain from sexual immorality” out of a concern that the believers be circumspect about the moral and spiritual condition of those with whom they are dining.  If that was the case, the addition of “abstain from what has been strangled and from blood” would seem wholly out of place.  Instead, we must hear this as a single directive, all of it having to do with food and the meal table.  James apparently does want the Jews and Gentiles to be able to share the same table (the divisions and problems at Antioch began at the meal table), so these particular directives are what will allow the Jewish believers to join the Gentile believers at the same table.  James wants the Gentile believers to abstain from food that has been defiled by idols, food that has been defiled by sexual immorality, food that has been defiled by strangling, and food that is defiled by the presence of the blood.  If they do this, then they will be able to join the Jewish believers (the true people of the covenant?) at their meal table.  Failing this, in his estimation, table division should not continue.

Paul, and apparently Peter before the men arrived from James arrived in Antioch, did not find it necessary to hold out such restrictions.  For Paul, and apparently Peter (the Cornelius story of the tenth chapter of Acts playing a role in this), the only thing that mattered was the belief in Jesus as Lord, with that functioning as the basis for open table fellowship between Jew and Gentile.  Paul would not insist that Jewish Christ-believers eat food that they would consider to be defiled, but he would insist that such food not be the basis for the failure for all to come together at the same table, or be the justification for separate meal tables in the church.  At the same, as evidenced by what James wants to write, there does appear to be unanimous agreement that if the meal table was divided, so too would the church be divided.  Hierarchies and divisions would develop and be exacerbated, and this would ultimately be destructive to the church and deleterious to the message of the Gospel.  James wants to put the onus on the Gentiles, insisting that they conform to Jewish custom in this matter.  Paul, on the other hand, wants love to rule the day.    

Jerusalem & The Justification Of Gentiles (part 1 of 2)

As we know, the Apostle Paul’s travels are well chronicled.  A portion of those travels are quickly chronicles in Acts fourteen.  We find that from Lystra, he returns to Iconium, and from there, he makes his way back to Antioch.  Upon return to Antioch, he and Barnabas “gathered the church together” and “reported all the things God had done with them, and that He had opened a door of faith for the Gentiles” (14:27b).  All is well in Antioch until “some men came down from Judea and began to teach the brothers, ‘Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.’” (15:1)  By this, we understand why Acts throws helpful light on Romans.  We can place this alongside the happenings that Paul reports in Galatians two.  The agitation that is on display in the letter to the Galatians, as Paul recounts his Antioch experience, demonstrates the seriousness of the issue of Gentile justification by faith. 

We’ll note that Luke moves directly from God’s opening of a door of faith for the Gentiles, to the veritable closing of that door through the insistence on circumcision.  Whereas Paul understood the message of the Gospel to encompass the idea that Israel was “to be a light to the Gentiles, to bring salvation to the ends of the earth” (13:47b) in an outward movement that would see the development of an ever-widening circle of the covenant people of God, the insistence upon circumcision represented an inward turning and a limitation of the efficacy of the Gospel message.  Thus it is easy to understand Luke’s report that “Paul and Barnabas had a major argument and debate with them” (15:2a).  Luke shows restraint in this statement, as Paul’s letter to the Galatians reports a dramatic response on Paul’s part, owing to the fact that the same type of message was being then promulgated in Galatia. 

That said, chapter fifteen of Acts becomes a significant chapter in any study or consideration of justification, and the covenant marker of belief in Jesus, as we learn that “the church,” owing to the major argument and debate, “appointed Paul and Barnabas and some others from among them to go up to meet with the apostles and elders in Jerusalem about this point of disagreement.  So they were sent on their way by the church… When they arrived in Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all the things God had done with them.  But some from the religious party of the Pharisees who had believed stood up and said, ‘It is necessary to circumcise the Gentiles and to order them to observe the law of Moses.’” (15:2b-3a,4-5)  Based on our knowledge about Paul from his letters, we know he is going to vociferously oppose this stance, though at this point in Luke’s history of the early church we have only just learned about Paul’s opposition to any requirement for Gentile believers to be circumcised.  It is here that the reader of Acts first learns about Paul’s position, but it is safe to say that he has already worked out his opposition to any need for Gentiles to observe the works of the law, and especially that which had become the traditional covenant markers, based on the apostle’s knowledge of God’s dealings with Abraham.

In Jerusalem then, “Both the apostles and the elders met together to deliberate about this matter.  After there had been much debate, Peter,” mindful of Paul’s rebuke in Antioch and in contemplation of his experiences with Gentile believers, “stood up and said to them, ‘Brothers, you know that some time ago God chose me to preach to the Gentiles so they would hear the message of the Gospel and believe.’” (15:6-7)  We’ll notice that Peter ends with “believe,” not “believe and be circumcised.”  Furthermore, “God, who knows the heart, has testified to them by giving them the Holy Spirit just as He did to us” (15:8).  Here, Peter (and Luke) makes reference to the events of Pentecost and his visit to Cornelius.  So here, though he does not go into details, we essentially have a third telling of the story of Cornelius and the pouring out of the Holy Spirit, which has Pentecost as its formulaic basis. 

Pointing out the folly of the insistence that Gentiles be circumcised and forced to abide by the law of Moses, Peter says “and He made no distinction between them and us, cleansing their hearts by faith” (15:9).  Jews and Gentiles are grouped together, without distinction.  There is then no need for them to take steps to look like Jews, for God, effectively, has circumcised their hearts.  As we well know, Paul has picked up on the “no distinction” idea, and used it for the purpose of identifying with Gentiles, while also emphasizing the circumcision of the heart (cleansing their hearts by faith).  Having said this, Peter pointedly asks “So now why are you putting God to the test by placing on the neck of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear?” (15:10)  Notice that it is not the Gentiles being put to the test, but God.  Notice also that Peter already refers to uncircumcised Gentiles as disciples, while also placing them within the lineage of Israel’s ancestors.  In conclusion then, Peter states that “On the contrary, we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they are” (15:11).  Thus, Peter disavows the value of the traditional covenant markers in justification, reinforcing the lack of distinction between Jew and Gentile in the kingdom of God that was inaugurated at the Resurrection, and elevating belief in Jesus as the mark of covenant inclusion and participation in the family of Abraham.         

Parallel Stories

The fourteenth chapter of Acts begins as a continuation of the thirteenth chapter of Acts.  Rather than repeating what would come to be a fairly standard occurrence, Luke writes “The same thing happened in Iconium when Paul and Barnabas went into the Jewish synagogue” (14:1a).  That “same thing,” of necessity and due to the rapid movement of the narrative from one story to the next, must include the idea that “the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit” (13:52).  The Holy Spirit was being poured out in Iconium, as Paul “spoke in such a way that a large group of both Jews and Greeks believed” (14:1b).  With more and more people being embraced by the arms of covenant due to their believing, “they stayed there for a considerable time, speaking out courageously for the Lord” (14:3a). 

In association with this speaking out on His behalf, Luke insists that the Lord, “testified to the message of His grace” (14:3b), with that message and grace being the Gospel (Jesus is Lord) and the extension of the covenant implied by that message of God becoming King in and through and as His Christ (Messiah/King), and confirmed by the “granting of miraculous signs and wonders to be performed through their hands” (14:3c).  This is an obvious, conscientious adaptation of the words from Joel that had been on the lips of Peter at Pentecost, as recorded in the second chapter, which was “I will pour out My Spirit in those days and they will prophesy.  And I will perform wonders in the sky above and miraculous signs on the earth below” (2:18b-19a).  To this Peter had added talk of “Jesus the Nazarene, a man clearly attested to you by God with powerful deeds, wonders, and miraculous signs that God performed among you through Him” (2:22b). 

Later on in that same chapter, we find another point of allusion, in that “Reverential awe came over everyone, and many wonders and miraculous signs came about by the apostles” (2:43), not the least of which was “All who believed were together and held everything in common, and they began to sell their property and possessions and distributing the proceeds to everyone, as anyone had need” (2:44-45).  By this, they accomplished what Caesar could not (which is the subject of another study), while proclaiming the Gospel in their very actions, gaining “the good will of all the people” (2:47a), with the result that “the Lord was adding to their number every day those who were being saved” (2:47b).  This took place as more and more came to the confession of Jesus as Lord, thereby joining the covenant people of God based on their allegiance to and belief in that claim. 

What were the miraculous signs and wonders performed by Paul and Barnabas in Iconium?  Though there is no specific, immediate mention, and though even in chapter two Luke passes over this statement without making what we would think of as any immediate, substantiating claims, chapter three contains the record of a man that had been lame from birth being healed, at the command of Peter, in the name of Jesus.  This healing in Jesus’ name, as was the point of other healing stories that would have been a component of the oral (pre-written) Jesus tradition in Paul’s day, made the point that Jesus did indeed rule over all things.  We can imagine the same types of things are in mind when Luke will later write about the performance of signs and wonders in connection with speaking out courageously for the Lord Jesus (as did Peter and John).

Though they met with opposition, with this opposition eventually forcing the need to flee from Iconium to other cities, Paul was never dissuaded from his message, as Luke records that he “continued to proclaim the good news” (14:7).  Let us never fail to equate “good news” with “Gospel.”  Concurrently, let us never fail to equate “Gospel” with “announcements about the ruler of the world.”  We shall not fail in this because neither the audiences of Luke or Paul or any of the earliest believers in Jesus would have failed in this.

Not only do we imagine that Luke intends to draw out the similarities between the preaching of the Gospel at Pentecost and Paul’s preaching of the Gospel in other cities, which serves as an indication that Pentecost (the pouring out of the Holy Spirit so as to create belief in Jesus as the means by which God would place people in right standing with Him---make righteous, justify, save, etc…), in a way, was an event that was repeated whenever and wherever the Gospel was being preached, but the report of miraculous signs and wonders in chapter fourteen (though the setting has changed from Iconium to Lystra) is followed by an event that almost precisely parallels the mention of signs and wonders in chapter and two and the event that opens chapter three.  As we hear about “a man… lame from birth” (14:8) that is healed at the command of Paul, we consider the idea that the preaching of the Gospel message (the good news) has the same impact and effect in Gentile cities, and on and for Gentiles, as it did in Jerusalem, and on and for Jews. 

In an almost comical twist, the healing in chapter fourteen results in “the priest of the temple of Zeus” bringing “bulls and garlands to the city gates,” as “he and the crowds wanted to offer sacrifices to them” (14:13).  When a lame man is healed in chapter three, at the Temple in Jerusalem, “the priests and the commander of the Temple guard and the Sadducees came up to them, angry because they were teaching in Jesus the Resurrection of the dead.  So they seized them and put them in jail until the next day” (4:1b-3a).  Divergent responses indeed.  This, of course, followed the people “being filled with astonishment and amazement at what had happened” (3:10b), as the people were “completely astounded” and “ran together to” (3:11) Peter and John.  In the parallel story in Lystra, it just so happened that “when the crowds saw what Paul had done, they should in the Lycaonian language, ‘The gods have come down to us in human form!’” (14:11b)  Following the healing (though before the arrival of the priests from the Temple), Peter and John took the opportunity to preach Jesus, in whom “The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our forefathers” (3:13a), had taken human form.  Paul, after the arrival of the priest from the temple, took the opportunity to proclaim the power of the same Creator God, who was the ultimate subject of the good news that he had been preaching.  Peter and John had to argue for their lives, were threatened, and eventually released.  Paul, preaching the same Jesus and the same God, with the same, subversive subtext, “scarcely persuaded the crowds not to offer sacrifice” (14:18b) to he and Barnabas.       

Paul's Mission, Gentiles & The Holy Spirit

In verse two of chapter thirteen of Acts we read “While they were serving the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’” (13:2)  With this being presented as the direct command of the Holy Spirit, and with knowledge that it is the Gentile mission to which Paul has been called (as indicated by the directive by which the Lord Jesus, after speaking to Saul on the road to Damascus, instructs a man named Ananias in regards to Saul, saying “Go, because this man is My chosen instrument to carry My name before Gentiles and kings and the people of Israel” – 9:15) and which will receive the great bulk of his attention, we should not be surprised to find mention of the Holy Spirit being quite frequent in the story of Paul’s ministry. 

It seems that Luke wants to make it abundantly clear that the Holy Spirit, which he has Jesus mentioning at the close of Luke and the opening of Acts, as that which Jesus has promised and which will be the means by which His followers will be able to function as His witnesses, is the one that is sending Paul out to the Gentiles.  Accordingly, in verse four of the same chapter we read “So Barnabas and Saul, sent out by the Holy Spirit” (13:4a), with this quickly followed by mention of Selucia, Cyprus, Salamis, and Paphos (13:4-6).  Even though “they began to proclaim the word of God in the Jewish synagogues” (13:5b), the Gospel message would not be long restricted to this environment. 

A  few verses later, we again hear of the Holy Spirit in an encounter with a man first introduced as “Bar-Jesus,” who is later known as “Elymas,” when we read that “Saul (also known as Paul), filled with the Holy Spirit, stared straight at him” (13:9a) and spoke words of rebuke.  Shortly, we find Paul in the synagogue in Pisidian Antioch, speaking to the “Men of Israel and… Gentiles who fear God” (13:16b).  In his speech to these people, Paul tells them the story of Israel, which implies that this has value for a Gentile audience as well (as they are being included in the family of Abraham---God’s family of redemption).  The story of Israel begins with the Egyptian exodus, climaxes in the Resurrection of Jesus, and leads to talk of justification for all of his audience. 

Paul’s talk of justification, within his Holy Spirit directed mission, has him saying “by this one everyone who believes is justified from everything from which the law of Moses could not justify you” (13:39), which, when we take into consideration that his speech began with talk of Israel in bondage to Egypt (exile), seems to be an indicator that his audience is in an exile of their own, in need of the experience of exodus.  Their justification (covenant inclusion, salvation) will be their exodus, as Moses, most importantly, is linked to the event of exodus, God’s establishment of a covenant people to serve His purposes, and a symbol of that justification.  With Moses, that symbol was the law.  With the new Moses (Jesus), that symbol is trust in the Gospel (Jesus is Lord), which is a trust like that first demonstrated by Abraham. 

It is here that Paul meets with opposition to his message, presumably because it so freely incorporates Gentiles, without restriction or any need to undergo long-standing rites of qualification (no need to adopt the then current covenant markers of circumcision, Sabbath-keeping, food laws).  Thus, the next time Paul has the opportunity to speak to the assembly, “the Jews… began to contradict what Paul was saying” (13:45), which eventually prompts the declaration of “turning to the Gentiles” (13:46b), with all of this occurring under the auspices of the activity of the Holy Spirit.  Paul even adds, quoting Isaiah, that “this is what the Lord has commanded us: ‘I have appointed you to be a light for the Gentiles, to bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’” (13:47)  Paul grasps on to the words of the prophet to make the point that God’s covenant plan had always included Gentiles, and that it was His intention for His covenant people to take His salvation out to the peoples of the world, rather than forcing those peoples to come to them. 

Consequently, “When the Gentiles heard this, they began to rejoice and praise the word of the Lord, and all who had been appointed to eternal life believed” (13:48).  Listening to the forty-eighth verse in its immediate context and in its narrative context, as well as alongside the soteriological context provided by Paul’s thoughts about justification as expressed in Romans and elsewhere, we are not allowed to hear this as a selective statement about some that had been pre-destined to believe, while others were pre-destined not to believe.  Rather, we hear it as a reference to Gentiles, as it had always been God’s plan for Gentiles to believe, as they too, as divine image-bearers, had been appointed to participate in the life of the age to come, doing so right alongside Israel.  As this particular portion of the narrative is brought to a close, Luke reminds us of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit, which first occurred at Pentecost and sparked a highly determinative message from Peter and set the stage for what would come in the story he would be telling in this book, by writing about the Gentiles who were hearing and rejoicing at the words of Paul concerning Jesus, that “the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit” (13:52).

Kingdom For All (part 2 of 2)

Once the operative realm of the concept of justification is understood, and as we are able to operate more freely and comfortably with its connection to covenant inclusion, irrespective of national origin or physical descent, we find the way that it is introduced into the letter to Galatians is more than sensible.  Paul brings the issue to the table by recounting his experience with Peter in Antioch, writing “But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he had clearly done wrong.  Until certain people came from James, he had been eating with the Gentiles.  But when they arrived, he stopped doing this and separated himself because he was afraid of those who were pro-circumcision” (2:11-12).  The “pro-circumcision” party are those that expected Gentile believers in Jesus to Judaize.  They expected these believers, in demonstration of their joining up with the elect people of God, to undergo circumcision.  Most likely, this would have included an expectation that they would adhere to Sabbath-keeping and food laws as well, with this presumption founded on Paul’s talk of Peter’s eating with Gentiles and his subsequent cessation of this practice. 

According to Paul, Peter’s withdrawal from table fellowship with the Gentiles was equivalent to agreeing with the need for Gentile believers to Judaize, thus devaluing the confession of Jesus as Lord as the sole necessary covenant marker that identified one as a participant in the covenant people, in the church, and as ambassadors of the kingdom of God that had been announced and inaugurated by Jesus.  Paul will later go on to point out that a devaluing of this confession, which is not to be separated from the crucifixion and the Resurrection of Jesus, is functionally equivalent to devaluing the death of Christ and making it irrelevant.  In addition, this action on the part of Peter apparently flew in the face of his own confession and that to which he had previously agreed, which was that there was no need for Gentiles to undergo the rite of circumcision in connection with their covenant-based confession, and no need for them to adopt any of the traditional covenant markers. 

As previously noted, when Paul visited Jerusalem, with Titus in tow, Titus was not “compelled to be circumcised, although he was a Greek” (2:3b), thus ultimately confirming the truth of Paul’s gospel (2:5).  The influential leaders of the church, in Jerusalem, as Paul said, added nothing to his message (2:6), which pronounced justification through an oath of loyalty to Jesus alone (faith alone), apart from the works of the law.  Peter had played a role in the assessment of Paul’s message, but now, by his actions, he was effectively adding to Paul’s message and even contradicting it to an extent, affirming the insistence that circumcision must take place, and treating the Gentile believers as if they were, somehow, fundamentally different and in need of making themselves look like Jews so as to participate in the covenant people (thus contradicting his experience in Acts chapter ten, which would have been well-known to all the church, and especially to Paul as the Apostle to the uncircumcised). 

For all of these reasons, Paul accuses Peter of rank hypocrisy, adding that “the rest of the Jews also joined him in this hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was led astray with them by their hypocrisy” (2:13).  To that, Paul adds, echoing the words of the fifth verse of this chapter, “But when I saw that they were not behaving consistently with the truth of the Gospel,” which finds no separation between Jew and Gentile while promoting the unity of the church of Christ under one and only one covenant marker, “I said to Cephas in front of them all, ‘If you, although you are a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew,’” implying that Peter himself had abandoned Sabbath-keeping and food laws, thus abandoning any pretense of the value of those in light of what God had accomplished in Christ, “’how can you try to force the Gentiles to live like Jews?’” (2:14)  This is a stinging indictment of one who had a reputation as a pillar of the church (2:9), and no doubt caused Peter to reflect on his rooftop visions, his experience with Cornelius and his household as recorded in Acts, and now his own failure to live out and live up to the truth of the Gospel. 

Kingdom For All (part 1 of 2)

But when the one who set me apart was pleased to reveal His Son in me so that I could preach Him among the Gentiles… - Galatians 1:15-16a  (NET)

This mention of Paul’s call to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles is an excellent precursor to what follows in the second chapter of this letter to Galatia.  Raising the issue of Gentile inclusion under the banner of the covenant, which is the purpose of preaching the Gospel to the Gentiles, necessarily invokes considerations of adequate covenant marking.  In regards to this, as Paul relates the story of his journey to Jerusalem in the years following his own conversion, and as his ministry and message of Gentile inclusion among God’s covenant people based on confession of Jesus as Lord has been established for quite some time, he writes “not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, although he was a Greek” (2:3).  This is key, as it assists Paul in laying the foundation for his arguments concerning justification---what it is, how it occurs, and what it represents---which comes later in the second chapter. 

Why is it significant that Titus, a Gentile, was not compelled to be circumcised?  It’s significant because of who it is that did not do the compelling, namely, the “influential people” (2:2) in the Jerusalem church.  If these “influential people,” located in Jerusalem, which was the obviously the bastion of Judaism and the geographical source of those that went out to other churches in other areas insisting on the need for Gentiles to Judaize in order to properly and legitimately participate in the covenant and to enjoy its promised blessings, did not insist on circumcision for Titus (with circumcision also standing in for the other covenant markers of Sabbath-keeping and food laws), then this spoke volumes for Paul’s message and his understanding of the justification that he had been preaching for fifteen years.  In fact, Paul makes it clear that the only ones that insisted on Gentile circumcision and their performance of the works of the law were “false brothers with false pretenses” (2:4b).  By deduction then, true brothers with true motives were those that recognized the basis for Gentile justification as belief in Jesus as Lord. 

Further elaborating on his time in Jerusalem, and further validating the argument that he is presenting to the Galatian brethren, Paul informs them that “those who were influential… added nothing to my message” (2:6a,c).  Not only was his message about justification and its corresponding covenant markers that allowed Gentiles to enter the covenant people as non-Judaizing Gentiles accurate, but there was no fault to be found with it.  It is also possible that Paul meant this statement as a double entendre, insisting that nothing needed to be added to the acceptance of the Gospel, such as circumcision, Sabbath keeping, or adherence to food laws (this is not about doing “good works”), to validate one’s justified status. 

With what immediately follows, we see that Paul never loses sight, and never allows his audience to lose sight of the all-peoples inclusion and world-encompassing nature of what the God of Israel had accomplished and set forth through the Messiah Jesus, as he adds to the lack of the addition of anything to his message, writing “On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the Gospel to the uncircumcised just as Peter was to the circumcised… they gave to Barnabas and me the right hand of fellowship, agreeing that we would go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised” (2:7,9b). 

Though there is a distinction drawn in terms of ministry focus, there is no distinction drawn between Jews and Gentiles in terms of their position relative to the covenant God or in their participation in His kingdom that has been inaugurated through the Resurrection of Jesus, nor is there a distinction in the message that is to be preached to Jews and Gentiles.  Both groups are to hear and accede to the message that confession of the Gospel’s claim is now the basis for God’s ongoing covenant with His people, and that His people now consist of people drawn from all nations, without distinction. 

This cannot be said enough, as it is the ground in which the concept of justification is rooted.  We cannot allow ourselves to be distracted by an incorrect approach to the issue of justification, especially as it is addressed in Romans three and Galatians two, which would have us considering the subject in terms of attaining an individual salvation that looks to an eternity in heaven as the reward of “faith alone” that stands against an attempt to achieve heaven via performing “works” in accordance with a code of law.  This approach, which would not be recognized or understood by Paul himself, must be removed from the field, as justification has primarily to do with being included in the covenant people of God. 

“Faith alone” versus “works” is only relevant to a discussion of covenant markers, inseparable from the Jew/Gentile divide and the barriers that had heretofore prevented the enlargement of God’s covenant people, with “faith alone” standing for the new covenant marker that coincides with the new age of the kingdom that has dawned and the new creation that manifests itself whenever a person confesses the Lordship of Jesus and so is “in Christ,” while “works” stands for the old covenant markers that Paul now equates with the old age that preceded the coming of the kingdom of God (that must exist and already be ongoing because of the claim that Jesus is Lord and King) and the old creation that is steadily passing away in the face of the victory of God foretold and begun in Christ’s victory over death and the grave.