Chapter Three
Chapter Three
The Freedom Fighter—Part 1
This will remain the land of the free only so long as it is the home of the brave.” So wrote veteran news analyst Elmer Davis in his book But We Were Born Free, and his convictions would certainly be echoed by the apostle Paul. To Paul, his spiritual liberty in Christ was worth far more than popularity or even security. He was willing to fight for that liberty.
Paul’s first fight for Christian liberty was at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:1–35; Gal. 2:1–10); his second was at a private meeting with Peter (Gal. 2:11–21). Had Paul been unwilling to wage this spiritual warfare, the church in the first century might have become only a Jewish sect, preaching a mixture of law and grace. But because of Paul’s courage, the gospel was kept free from legalism, and it was carried to the Gentiles with great blessing.
Before we look at the three acts in the first drama, the Council at Jerusalem, we must get acquainted with the participants. Paul, of course, we know as the great apostle to the Gentiles.
Barnabas was one of Paul’s closest friends. In fact, when Paul tried to get into the fellowship of the Jerusalem church, it was Barnabas who opened the way for him (Acts 9:26–28).
The name Barnabas means “son of encouragement,” and you will always find Barnabas encouraging somebody. When the gospel came to the Gentiles in Antioch, it was Barnabas who was sent to encourage them in their faith (Acts 11:19–24).
Thus, from the earliest days, Barnabas was associated with the Gentile believers. It was Barnabas who enlisted Paul to help minister at the church in Antioch (Acts 11:25–26), and the two of them worked together not only in teaching, but also in helping the poor (vv. 27–30).
Barnabas accompanied Paul on the first missionary trip (Acts 13:1—14:28) and had seen God’s blessings on the gospel that they preached. It is worth noting that it was Barnabas who encouraged young John Mark after he had dropped out of the ministry and incurred the displeasure of Paul (13:13; 15:36–41). In later years, Paul was able to commend Mark and benefit from his friendship (Col. 4:10; 2 Tim. 4:11).
Titus was a Gentile believer who worked with Paul and apparently was won to Christ through the apostle’s ministry (Titus 1:4). He was a product of the apostle’s ministry among the Gentiles and was taken to the Jerusalem conference as “exhibit A” from the Gentile churches. In later years, Titus assisted Paul by going to some of the most difficult churches to help them solve their problems (2 Cor. 7; Titus 1:5).
Three men were the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem: Peter; John; and James, the brother of the Lord (who must not be confused with the apostle James, who was killed by Herod, Acts 12:1–2). Peter we know from his prominent part in the accounts in the Gospels as well as in the first half of the book of Acts. It was to Peter that Jesus gave “the keys,” so that it was he who was involved in opening the door of faith to the Jews (Acts 2), the Samaritans (Acts 8), and the Gentiles (Acts 10). John we also know from the gospel records as one of Christ’s “inner three” apostles, associated with Peter in the ministry of the Word (Acts 3:1ff.).
It is James who perhaps needs more introduction. The gospel record indicates that Mary and Joseph had children, and James was among them (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3). (Of course, Jesus was born by the power of the Spirit, and not through natural generation, Matt. 1:18–25; Luke 1:26–38.) Our Lord’s brothers and sisters did not believe in Him during His earthly ministry (John 7:1–5). Yet we find “his brethren” associated with the believers in the early church (Acts 1:13–14). Paul informed us that the risen Christ appeared to James, and this was the turning point in his life (1 Cor. 15:5–7). James was the leader of the early church in Jerusalem (Acts 15; see also 21:18). He was also the writer of the epistle of James, and that letter, plus Acts 21:18, would suggest that he was very Jewish in his thinking.
Along with these men, and the “apostles and elders” (Acts 15:4, 6), were a group of “false brethren” who infiltrated the meetings and tried to rob the believers of their liberty in Christ (Gal. 2:4). Undoubtedly these were some of the Judaizers who had followed Paul in church after church and had tried to capture his converts. The fact that Paul called them “false brethren” indicates that they were not true Christians, but were only masquerading as such so they could capture the conference for themselves.
This, then, is the cast of characters. Acts 15 should be read along with Galatians 2:1–10 to get the full story of the event.
ACT 1—THE PRIVATE CONSULTATION (2:1–2)
Paul and Barnabas had returned to Antioch from their first missionary journey, excited about the way God had “opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles” (Acts 14:27). But the Jewish legalists in Jerusalem were upset with their report; so they came to Antioch and taught, in effect, that a Gentile had to become a Jew before he could become a Christian (15:1).
Circumcision, which they demanded of the Gentiles, was an important Jewish rite, handed down from the days of Abraham (Gen. 17). Submitting to circumcision meant accepting and obeying the whole Jewish law. Actually, the Jewish people had forgotten the inner, spiritual meaning of the rite (Deut. 10:16; Jer. 4:1–4; Rom. 2:25–29), just as some churches today have lost the spiritual meaning of baptism and have turned it into an external ritual. The true Christian has experienced an inner circumcision of the heart (Col. 2:10–11) and does not need to submit to any physical operation (Phil. 3:1–3).
When Paul and Barnabas confronted these men with the truth of the gospel, the result was a heated argument (Acts 15:2). It was decided that the best place to settle the question was before the church leaders in Jerusalem. We should not think that this “Jerusalem Conference” was a representative meeting from all the churches, such as a denominational conference; it was not. Paul, Barnabas, Titus, and certain other men from Antioch represented the Gentile Christians who had been saved totally apart from Jewish law, but there were no representatives from the churches Paul had established in Gentile territory.
When the deputation arrived in Jerusalem, they met privately with the church leaders. Paul did not go to Jerusalem because the church sent him; he “went up by revelation”—that is, the Lord sent him (compare Gal. 2:1 and 1:12). And the Lord gave him the wisdom to meet with the leaders first so that they would be able to present a united front at the public meetings.
“Lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain” (Gal. 2:2) does not mean that Paul was unsure either of his message or his ministry. His conduct on the way to the conference indicates that he had no doubts (Acts 15:3). What he was concerned about was the future of the gospel among the Gentiles, because this was his specific ministry from Christ. If the “pillars” sided with the Judaizers, or tried to compromise, then Paul’s ministry would be in jeopardy. He wanted to get their approval before he faced the whole assembly; otherwise a three-way division could result.
What was the result of this private consultation? The apostles and elders approved Paul’s gospel. They added nothing to it (Gal. 2:6b) and thereby declared the Judaizers to be wrong. But this private meeting was only the beginning.
ACT 2—THE PUBLIC CONVOCATION (2:3–5)
The historical account of the Council of Jerusalem is recorded by Luke (Acts 15:6–21). Several witnesses presented the case for the gospel of the grace of God, beginning with Peter (vv. 7–11). It was he who had been chosen by God to take the gospel to the Gentiles originally (Acts 10), and he reminded the assembly that God gave the Holy Spirit to the believing Gentiles just as He did to the Jews, so that there was “no difference.”
This had been a difficult lesson for the early Christians to learn, because for centuries there had been a difference between Jews and Gentiles (Lev. 11:43–47; 20:22–27). In His death on the cross, Jesus had broken down the barriers between Jews and Gentiles (Eph. 2:11–22), so that in Christ there are no racial differences (Gal. 3:28). In his speech to the conference, Peter made it clear that there is but one way of salvation: faith in Jesus Christ.
Then Paul and Barnabas told the assembly what God had done among the Gentiles (Acts 15:12), and what a “missionary report” that must have been! The “false brethren” who were there must have debated with Paul and Barnabas, but the two soldiers of the cross would not yield. Paul wanted the “truth of the gospel” to continue among the Gentiles (Gal. 2:5).
It seems that Titus became a test case at this point. He was a Gentile Christian who had never submitted to circumcision. Yet it was clear to all that he was genuinely saved. Now, if the Judaizers were right (“Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved,” Acts 15:1), then Titus was not a saved man. But he was a saved man, and gave evidence of having the Holy Spirit; therefore, the Judaizers were wrong.
At this point, it might be helpful if we considered another associate of Paul—Timothy (see Acts 16:1–3). Was Paul being inconsistent by refusing to circumcise Titus, yet agreeing to circumcise Timothy? No, because two different issues were involved. In the case of Timothy, Paul was not submitting to Jewish law in order to win him to Christ. Timothy was part Jew, part Gentile, and his lack of circumcision would have hindered his ministry among the people of Israel. Titus was a full Gentile, and for him to have submitted would have indicated that he was missing something in his Christian experience. To have circumcised Titus would have been cowardice and compromise; not to have circumcised Timothy would have been to create unnecessary problems in his ministry.
James, the leader of the church, gave the summation of the arguments and the conclusion of the matter (Acts 15:13–21). As Jewish as he was, he made it clear that a Gentile does not have to become a Jew in order to become a Christian. God’s program for this day is to “take out of the Gentiles a people for his name.” Jews and Gentiles are saved the same way: through faith in Jesus Christ. James then asked that the assembly counsel the Gentiles to do nothing that would offend unbelieving Jews, lest they hinder them from being saved. Paul won the battle.
His view prevailed in the private meeting when the leaders approved his gospel and in the public meeting when the group agreed with Paul and opposed the Judaizers.
Echoes of the Jerusalem Conference are heard repeatedly in Paul’s letter to the Galatians. Paul mentioned the “yoke of bondage” (Gal. 5:1), reminding us of Peter’s similar warning (Acts 15:10). The themes of liberty and bondage are repeated often (Gal. 2:4; 4:3, 9, 21–31; 5:1), as is the idea of circumcision (Gal. 2:3; 5:3–4; 6:12–13).
Centuries later, today’s Christians need to appreciate afresh the courageous stand Paul and his associates took for the liberty of the gospel. Paul’s concern was “the truth of the gospel” (Gal. 2:5, 14) not the “peace of the church.” The wisdom that God sends from above is “first pure, then peaceable” (James 3:17). “Peace at any price” was not Paul’s philosophy of ministry, nor should it be ours.
Ever since Paul’s time, the enemies of grace have been trying to add something to the simple gospel of the grace of God. They tell us that a man is saved by faith in Christ plus something—good works, the Ten Commandments, baptism, church membership, religious ritual—and Paul made it clear that these teachers are wrong. In fact, Paul pronounced a curse on any person (man or angel) who preaches any other gospel than the gospel of the grace of God, centered in Jesus Christ (Gal. 1:6–9; see 1 Cor. 15:1–7 for a definition of the gospel). It is a serious thing to tamper with the gospel.
ACT 3—THE PERSONAL CONFIRMATION (2:6–10)
The Judaizers had hoped to get the leaders of the Jerusalem church to disagree with Paul. By contrast, Paul made it clear that he himself was not impressed either by the persons or the positions of the church leaders. He respected them, of course. Otherwise he would not have consulted with them privately. But he did not fear them or seek to buy their influence. All he wanted them to do was recognize the grace of God at work in his life and ministry (Gal. 2:9), and this they did.
Not only did the assembly approve Paul’s gospel and oppose Paul’s enemies, but they also encouraged Paul’s ministry and recognized publicly that God had committed the Gentile aspect of His work into Paul’s hands. They could add nothing to Paul’s message or ministry, and they dared not take anything away. There was agreement and unity: One gospel would be preached to Jews and to Gentiles.
However, the leaders recognized that God had assigned different areas of ministry to different men. Apart from his visit to the household of Cornelius (Acts 10) and to the Samaritans (Acts 8), Peter had centered his ministry primarily among the Jews. Paul had been called as God’s special ambassador to the Gentiles. So, it was agreed that each man would minister in the sphere assigned to him by God.
“The gospel of the circumcision” and “the gospel of the uncircumcision” are not two different messages; it had already been agreed that there is only one gospel. Rather, we have here two different spheres of ministry, one to the Jews and the other to the Gentiles. Peter and Paul would both preach the same gospel, and the same Lord would be at work in and through them (Gal. 2:8), but they would minister to different peoples.
This does not mean that Paul would never seek to win the Jews. To the contrary, he had a great burden on his heart for his people (Rom. 9:1–3). In fact, when Paul came to a city, he would first go to the Jewish synagogue, if there was one, and start his work among his own people. Nor was Peter excluded from ministering to the Gentiles. But each man would concentrate his work in his own sphere assigned to him by the Holy Spirit. James, Peter, and John would go to the Jews; Paul would go to the Gentiles (Gal. 2:9b, where the word heathen means “Gentile nations”).
The Jerusalem Conference began with a great possibility for division and dissension, yet it ended with cooperation and agreement. “Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity” (Ps. 133:1). Perhaps we need to practice some of this same cooperation today.
We need to recognize the fact that God calls people to different ministries in different places, yet we all preach the same gospel and are seeking to work together to build His church. Among those who know and love Christ, there can be no such thing as “competition.” Peter was a great man, and perhaps the leading apostle, yet he gladly yielded to Paul—a newcomer—and permitted him to carry on his ministry as the Lord led him. Previously, Paul explained his independence from the apostles (Gal. 1); now in Galatians 2, he points out his interdependence with the apostles. He was free, and yet he was willingly in fellowship with them in the ministry of the gospel.
We move next from the theological to the practical—helping the poor (Gal. 2:10). Certainly these things go together. Correct doctrine is never a substitute for Christian duty (James 2:14–26). Too often our church meetings discuss problems, but they fail to result in practical help for the needy world. Paul had always been interested in helping the poor (Acts 11:27–30), so he was glad to follow the leaders’ suggestion.
Even though the conference ended with Paul and the leaders in agreement, it did not permanently solve the problem. The Judaizers did not give up, but persisted in interfering with Paul’s work and invading the churches he founded. Paul carried the good news of the council’s decision to the churches in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia (Acts 15:23) and in the other areas where he had ministered (16:4). But the Judaizers followed at his heels (like yelping dogs, see Phil. 3:1–3), starting at Antioch, where they even swayed Peter to their cause (see Gal. 2:11ff.).
There is little question that the Judaizers went to the churches of Galatia to sow their seeds of discord, and for this reason Paul had to write the letter we are now studying. It may have been written from Antioch shortly after the Council of Jerusalem, though some scholars date it later and have Paul writing from either Ephesus or Corinth. These historical details are important, but they are not vital to an understanding of the letter itself. Suffice it to say that this is probably Paul’s earliest letter, and in it we find every major doctrine that Paul believed, preached, and wrote about in his subsequent ministry.
The curtain falls on this drama, but it will go up to reveal another. Once again God’s “freedom fighter” will have to defend the truth of the gospel, this time before Peter.
QUESTIONS FOR PERSONAL REFLECTION OR GROUP DISCUSSION
1. Why was “son of encouragement” an appropriate name for Barnabas?
2. How have you encouraged someone or been encouraged lately?
3. What do you think the Judaizers were trying to accomplish?
4. How did Paul show great wisdom in the way he dealt with the church leaders?
5. The other apostles didn’t give Paul his gospel, but they did endorse it (2:7, 9). Why is this important?
6. How did Jesus’ death break down the barriers between Jews and Gentiles?
7. How was Titus a “test case” at the Jerusalem council (2:3)?
8. What forms of legalism exist today?
9. How do Christians today need to be “freedom fighters” as Paul was?
10. God sent Peter to take the gospel mainly to his fellow Jews, and He sent Paul to take the gospel to non-Jews. To whom has God sent you?