Gathered at Jerusalem I
Galatians 2:1-5 · Vern Peterman · Jun 3, 2007
Galatians (2007), No. 08
Holly Hills Bible Church
https://hollyhillsbiblechurch.org/teaching/messages/4926028583619

Transcribed from the recording by SermonAudio, so expect the occasional misheard word.

Good morning. We're going to be looking here at this passage that Wayne just read for us. I briefly would like first, however, just to remind you we're looking for signups. If you're in the Romans elective, we encourage you to stay there. But if not, we have the principle and principles of grace and in the Sermon on the Mount. to you or for you, both of those are open here, and you can sign up on the bulletin board in the lobby, and we encourage you to do so. We need to get some understanding of who's taking what, so at any rate, we encourage your pursuing that.

Today we're going to be looking at these first five verses of Galatians chapter 2 and then next week moving on to the next five verses, verses 2 through, excuse me, verses 6 through 10. Now, one of the things we've said before here is that Galatians is one big chiasm and that is a mirror image in writing. We are finishing up the second section, which is about the two ways of Paul's living, and we're just at the last part of that here this week and next week. A chiasm, as Jacqueline's been telling us for years now, is a mirror image in writing. So just so you've got that picture down.

All right, now you have, and this is also on page one of your handout on the top there, we're going to talk about Paul's known visits to Jerusalem. Dr. Luke, who accompanied Paul towards the latter end of his visits to Jerusalem, records five. The first one that he records is in Acts chapter 9. That's the same chapter that tells about Paul having come to know the Lord as Saul.

And then we correlated that with Galatians 1, verses 18 through 20. And then the next one that Dr. Luke records is in Acts 11, 27-30, and especially what you see recorded in verse 30. And we correlate that with the passage we're reading today, the first 10 verses in Galatians 2. After that, the book of Galatians would have been written.

Now, there is the possibility that Paul visited Jerusalem outside of what Dr. Luke recorded. I don't think that's real likely, and here's why. The Judaizers, the legalists, if he omitted some visit to Jerusalem, would be all over him. So I think the indication here is that we're getting the full story, but that's at least one possibility that stands outside.

The following three visits are recorded later on in the Book of Acts, and of course not in Galatians. Now let's take a look, here we are at the very first verse in Galatians chapter 2. Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also. Now recall here that Paul certainly had some meetings with the apostles and elders in Jerusalem.

Those meetings were not early, however, in his life as a Christian. And certainly they weren't for the purpose of Paul getting what's the gospel. It wasn't for Paul to be appointed as an apostle. And part of what Paul is explaining here in Galatians chapter 1 and chapter 2 is I didn't have to go to the guys in Jerusalem to get the gospel. I didn't have to go to these guys in Jerusalem in order to be authorized as an apostle.

I got the gospel directly, as he told us in chapter one, directly from Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ himself authorized me as an apostle. Paul is ultimately confident of those facts. He is not in the least questioning or wondering, boy, I wonder if this is okay for me to say these things. Having met personally with the Lord Jesus Christ, especially imagine his road to Damascus experience. He has no doubt, but what the Lord has this in front of him as the gospel, the Lord Jesus Christ, and the appointment of the Lord Jesus Christ as an apostle.

In chapter 2, here's what Paul's doing. He begins to make some other points, some additional points, based on his contact with the others who were in Jerusalem. He has already begun to lay the groundwork, as we saw in chapter 1. Here in chapter 2, he's starting to say, here's some subsequent visits and here's what happened.

Let me tell you, there is nothing in any of my visits to Jerusalem or any of my contacts with these apostles that supports the idea that I went to them to get the gospel or that I had to go to them in order to be appointed. And let me tell you the whole account. And that's what he's doing here. He's also going to follow on later on in chapter 2 about Peter's visit to Antioch.

Alright, so now you have these three guys making this trip to Jerusalem. There's Paul and Barnabas and Titus. Paul went up to Jerusalem. Remember that we said up to Jerusalem from the Old Testament starting about 1 Kings all the way into the New Testament. This phrase, up to Jerusalem, whether going up or went up, is a common and reoccurring phrase. Why? Because whether you came from the west side, from the ocean side, or whether you came from Jericho coming out of the Dead Sea area, either way, you're talking about up. Jerusalem was up either direction.

Here is Paul. He went with Barnabas, a man who was introduced back in chapter 4 of the book of Acts. He was a Jew. He was of the tribe of Levi. He was from the island of Cyprus. And he's initially introduced as one who sold land in order to give money and present it at the feet of the apostles. He already, when Paul came to know the Lord, he already had a long-standing relationship, a relationship of trust with the apostles there in Jerusalem.

There was also Titus, who was a Greek. Now there's some things we don't know about Titus, because interestingly, although he was certainly the companion of Paul's, his name is not recorded in the book of Acts. Some have speculated it might even be Luke's brother. Not real well founded. Some have said he may have come from Antioch. That's also not clearly stated. But certainly, it's said he was a Greek. That makes him under the category, he was a Gentile, a non-Jew, right?

Both of these men, Barnabas and Titus, continued a lengthy relationship with Paul. They had been together with Paul, and they were going to continue it for the rest of Paul's years. In addition to that, Paul also wrote to or about each one of these men. Certainly the book of Titus, three chapters, right there, next is 1st and 2nd Timothy. As a matter of fact, sequentially written between 1st and 2nd Timothy. That was written directly to Titus.

And then we have Barnabas. Paul writes about him, as well as Dr. Luke, writes about Barnabas several times. Barnabas was not his initial given name, it was Joseph, but Barnabas meaning son of encouragement was the name given to him afterwards. A pattern we see in a lot of the New Testament. Here's Peter is also Cephas, or Simon. And so here's another instance.

As we'll see it, the presence of both of these men will help Paul make his point. Remember we said Barnabas was a Levite, he's of the tribe of Levi, at least by that descendancy qualified to be a priest. We see that Titus being a Gentile would be a test case. Do you enforce the Law of Moses against these Gentiles? Alright, now, here's Paul. He is appointed as an apostle by whom? He makes it abundantly clear.

Paul, an apostle, not sent from men, nor through the agency of man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised him from the dead. The authority that he has as an apostle directly from God himself, specifically by the appointment of Jesus Christ.

Let me ask you, if you were appointed personally by the risen Lord Jesus Christ, right there, do you think he'd have some questions about, well, I wonder if I'm authorized? I don't think so. Additionally, Paul was given the gospel. He spent personal time face to face with the risen Lord Jesus Christ. This was the one that introduced himself to Paul by asking Saul, Shaul, in the original language, Shaul, why do you persecute, not the Christians, why do you persecute me? The Lord takes it personally, doesn't he?

Paul wrote in chapter 1, for I would have you know brethren, he does call them brothers, brothers in the Lord, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man, For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through the revelation of Jesus Christ." That's where I got it.

Galatians 2.2, second verse here. Now this is a verse that's full of all kinds of truths revealed, full of all kinds of things that sound even kind of heavy. So we're going to unpack it together real carefully. Are you ready for that? Can you handle that? Okay, let's go. First line, it was because of a revelation that I went up. Now there are a couple of possibilities. When he said a revelation, what did he mean by that? Possibility number one.

There is a fellow by the name of Agabus who is mentioned two times particularly in the book of Acts. The one that we look at here as being a fitting time is in chapter 11, verses 27-30. And so it could be Agabus revelation, and I think that's a likely, but certainly can't nail it down, a likely option. The second one is that Paul had another revelation specific to him that he doesn't give us the details on. So either of those are possible. The I went up is a shortened form of what he has used previously already, and we see throughout the scripture, I went up to Jerusalem, or I go up to Jerusalem. Now here's the passage in Acts 11, 27-30.

Now at this time some prophets came down from Jerusalem, so here they are from Jerusalem, they came to Antioch. Verse 28, One of them, named Agabus, stood up and began to indicate by the Spirit that there would certainly be a great famine all over the world.

And this took place in the reign of Claudius. Claudius reigned from 41 to 54, so he's bracketing the time. Verse 29, and in the proportion that any of the disciples had means, each of them determined to send a contribution for the relief of the brethren living in Judea, around Jerusalem. And they did this, sending it in charge of Barnabas and Saul to the elders. So if this was the trip that also included Titus, it would be in charge of Barnabas and Saul, or Paul as he was later called, and Titus went along to accompany and for other purposes. So this is the likely visit that we are seeing here in Galatians chapter 2.

Here's a timeline that you have still on page 1 of your handout. First you have there the famine of Acts that we just read through here. It was recorded by another Jewish historian, Josephus. It dates to about 46 A.D. and is likely at least one reason why Paul would visit Jerusalem. He and Barnabas being given responsibility to take the contribution to the help of the believers around Judea. Then Paul would take off with Barnabas on his first missionary journey. Here recorded in Acts 13 and 14 by Dr. Luke.

During that period of time right after the Jerusalem visit and then immediately following when Paul says, so soon you're taking off with this new gospel. Galatians is written right after he gets back from the this first missionary journey now would be the timeline like I say I think there's there's Possibility of some other variations in there, but the information we have seems to point in that direction Now let's look at the next line here in verse 2 I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles You see Paul didn't meet with Jesus Christ and say, well, I have got to get to the apostles and see if they are in sync with this.

No, he says, I've got it from Jesus Christ. That's sufficient for me. I had a face-to-face revelation from the Lord Jesus about which I have no doubt. I have no doubt about the content of the Gospel or the authority that I have to present this Gospel. And so he didn't run to Jerusalem to see if they had a cross-check.

No, he said years later. Fourteen years went by. A decade and a half. Think of what that would be in our own time. You'd be looking, if we were to count the time now, you'd be looking at the year 2020, 2021, before there would be any cross-check of this kind. Isn't that interesting? He just was not concerned about it at all. But, at one point in time, he did go and cross-check his time with them. This word preach is in the present tense, the gospel I now continue to preach. The gospel I've been preaching, certainly, and the gospel I to this very moment preach. That gospel.

It's the one that he had gotten directly from the Lord Jesus Christ. He had no doubt about it. He says, I have preached it for the last decade and a half, and I continue to preach it now. Paul also had preached this gospel with grace, through and through, all the way from the very beginning. Grace, grace, and more grace. Even though he had submitted his gospel to them already, he had previous to this, because he's recording it as history, he had submitted his gospel for review. He says, right now I continue to preach that. That should be evidence right there. When I met with these guys, I didn't have to change it. I preached that gospel just like I always have.

And then he says, but I did so in private to those who are of reputation. Now, why in private and who are the people of reputation? Let's answer that. Paul conveyed to the believers in Galatia, as he wrote this letter, that he discussed his gospel with these leaders in private, in a private situation. That likely means that the others were not present. They might be unaware of the meeting. And we'll soon see why Paul met in private with these. We'll find out here. Verse 9, it will tell us who he met. And exactly those names are James, the brother of our Lord. It wasn't James, the brother of John.

Because by this time, James, the brother of John, the beginning of Acts chapter 12, says that he was killed with the sword. He was the first of the twelve apostles to die. The one death specifically recorded historically in scripture. He was killed by the sword, and at this point in time, Peter was arrested.

But by the Lord's intervention, was freed. Nonetheless, it was James the brother of our Lord, not James the Apostle. And Cephas, or as the Aramaic has it, Kephas. And also John. Remember that John here was the last one to die. He was the one who wrote the book of Revelation. So interesting, the two brothers. Here's James, the brother of John, the first to die, recorded in scripture. John, the last to die. All the others were martyred in between.

Now, why did Paul keep writing about those of reputation? We will see as we go through this book, he keeps using this term. Why? Nowhere else does Paul use this set of words in this way, and especially with this kind of repetition in tight sequence. The King James Version, if you have that, says, who seemed in some of those places. But why did he do it here?

Well, Paul wasn't using this word to mock the reputation of the apostles. No. He had a good relationship with them. And he certainly didn't want to discourage respect for these men. He continued to respect these men. As a matter of fact, we'll see in a few weeks here, Peter even wrote in respect of Paul as an author of scripture. Now, his intent was not to belittle these guys.

That wasn't what he was getting at. More than likely, the reason for doing so is because these Judaizers, the legalists, the ones who were claiming that, no, Paul really didn't come from these guys, they were likely claiming Paul needs to get his information from the people who have some reputation, the ones back in Jerusalem, not just count on his own. He needs to rely on these people because they've got a reputation he doesn't. And so that's more likely what he's pointing to.

In contrast to Paul, these ones have reputation. You guys need to be getting the gospel from them. Now the end of verse 2. For fear that I might be running or had run in vain. Now this is kind of a head-scratcher. Here's Paul. Does it sound like he's afraid? It sounds like there's a concern there, isn't there?

One of the things that's helpful to know that this was a time where more and more tension was boiling up within the Jewish nation. There were different groups who were increasing opposition to the Romans. A group called the Zealots, and later on in the book of Acts another group called the Sicarii, translated assassins, and by that time it mentions 4,000 of them.

These guys were serious. And their thought, the belief among them, and it was a growing belief, the Messiah will only come when we get all the uncircumcised Gentiles out of Israel. That was their belief. And so imagine this. Okay, here's these guys with this belief.

We've got to get all the uncircumcised Gentiles out of Israel. Now here comes Paul. He's an ex-Pharisee. Oh man, this guy's a turncoat. The worst thing. And what does he do? He brings Titus, who is an uncircumcised Gentile. Oh, profoundly Greek. This guy is the worst thing that could possibly happen.

An ex-Pharisee bringing another uncircumcised Gentile among us and insisting that he say that way. An uncircumcised Gentile. So far as Paul's Opponents are concerned he is the worst of the worst, not only an ex-Pharisee, one who was with us and now has turned against us.

Do you know that 20 years later, people like Paul that were resisting this movement, they slaughtered them by the thousands? The Jews slaughtered their own people by the thousands. So this momentum of sentiment was gathering. Here too, is Titus coming in. He is case in point.

Here, we're trying to get rid of the uncircumcised Gentiles and Paul, the ex-Pharisee, our enemy, no doubt, is bringing one of these guys right here. Worst thing you could possibly do. Totally counter everything we're trying to accomplish. Paul's opposition to that Along with any of the Jews siding with him.

And here's Barnabas. And Titus, the uncircumcised Gentile, put them all in real physical danger. One of the things that was happening is that they were making plans. They'd already made multiple plans. How do we get Paul taken out? Now Barnabas has come on the scene. And both of them. Barnabas the Levi. He ought to be a priest of the tribe of Levi. And now we're going to bring in this Titus guy, uncircumcised Gentile. Paul often expressed a concern, as he wrote to the various people, about believers not doing something or doing something in vain. All for nothing. Have you ever had that kind of a feeling? It's all for naught. Oh, we've been working and doing this and putting all this effort, it's all for nothing. Ever had one of those moments?

It can be profoundly discouraging. He didn't want to come in some situation there and the whole thing blows up in his face. There might even be the thing of, well, I have total confidence that the Lord Jesus Christ authorized me, but what if things don't end up completely in sync with these apostles? That's a problem. This thing is precarious that we're going into, but we have no choice. We need to go in and get this resolved. Interesting thing is he used this phrase most commonly with those churches, including the ones in Galatia, where the church or the churches were or included a Roman colony. It's an interesting point.

Considering all the work that it takes to prepare for a race, the idea that you might run in vain would be a huge disappointment. Really massive. Ever run in vain? I did. Let's see, end of freshman year, two-mile race, it was 108 that day. That's eight times around the field. Fifth lap, everything started turning black and orange. People started looking like yellow jackets. All of a sudden, I dropped down, fifth lap. They said I kept running, but I don't know. I ran in vain, right? All the time and effort put into it, didn't finish. Paul did not want to be in that situation. He did not want to be in a place where all the work, all the effort, all goes for nothing.

Now, something as we get into the next three verses, each verse starts in the English, at least in this translation, with but, beauty. Something to point out is this first one here that's in the Greek, ala, a sharp contrast. So what he's doing is, here's a series of sharp contrasts. The first one that he heads up is the point where he makes a break. Here's the situation.

Here's the outcome in verses three through five. Here's how it turned out, guys. And let me tell you, Contrary to my fears, contrary to all the claims of these legalists, it turned out quite the other way. And let me tell you about it. That's what he's doing here, starting in verse 3. The Greek word here is translated but, and it's ala, which means a sharp contrast. Now we have a test case. Think of it Here you've got Paul, the ex-Pharisee, Barnabas, the Levite, certainly a Jew, and here these two Jewish men with qualifications as Jews that are second to none. These Jewish men bringing the Gentile Christian Titus.

Right there in Jerusalem, right in the thick of things. Question, does he have to be circumcised in order to be saved? Now the legalists, Dr. Luke records it in Acts 15, I think it's verse 1, they must be circumcised in order to be saved. Got it. Paul's answer, no, not even Titus. Here's the test case. I brought him with me. If these disciples of the Lord that walk with him as he ministered here on the earth, are to agree with the legalists, here's the test case. What was the answer? He says, no, not even Titus. Verse 4 there, this word, like the word Allah in the previous verse, shows some sharp contrasts. He doesn't actually have the Allah sharp contrast here, but he's continuing with the series of contrasts, rolling off of that first one.

It reveals the character, motive, means, and consequences of those who are promoting, keeping the law, and accumulating traditions. All the things that they added to the law of Moses. The extra things that you do so you make sure you don't break the law. They've got to do all that. You've got to do it to be saved initially, they said, and you've got to do it in order to stay saved. That was their message.

We have here in Galatians 2.4 this term false brethren. It's a word pair in English. It's one word in the Greek text. Matter of fact, the prefix there is pseudo. Pseudo. You might recognize that. It has in common with several words in the New Testament or word pairs with false.

False apostles, false circumcision, false prophets, false teachers. We title this next slide on page 3 of your handout, Accept No Limitations. The New Testament cautions about those who are called false. We have the false apostles in 2 Corinthians. Others came claiming, oh, I'm an apostle. Paul says, no, they're false. They're pseudo. We have the false circumcision. In fact, it's basically these same kinds of guys that are claiming, boy, you've got to do that physical thing, that's what counts.

We have the false prophets. An interesting pattern shows up that we'll get to in the Sermon on the Mount electives starting next month, and that is that false prophets is the Old Testament emphasis into the Gospels. The emphasis in the rest of the New Testament is on false teachers, and Peter makes a distinction of that. The threat to the church is mainly through the influence of these false teachers.

One point to take away here from this pattern is that discernment of what is true and what is false isn't optional. Not optional. The Lord is not calling us to paranoia and to phobia. We don't sit there and go, oh no, false teachers. He's wanting us to be discerning, not paranoid. We must be discerning.

Here's the next thing that Paul says there. These false brethren were secretly brought in, who had sneaked in to spy on us. Boy, have you ever seen a set of words by Paul that speak of clandestine, that speak of smuggling in? That's the idea. Secretly brought in is the idea of smuggling in. bringing in in secret.

You don't recognize it. Paul wasn't belittling the reputation of his fellow apostles, but he was unveiling the character of those who were bringing in this false gospel. Keep it secret. Do it underhandedly. Don't let them know who you really are. Paul was being very open about his gospel, wasn't he? But they wanted to do things very secretly.

The Greek words behind these words that are underlined here are rare. They either occur here, several of these words either occur here, only in scripture, or maybe one or two other places at most. They're very rare words because it's a special set of words that describes basically what 2,000 years back in time, but a spy operation. Yeah, that's what it was. It was a spy operation. This was clandestine, undercover, that's what it was. fake Christians, sham believers.

That's what he's talking about here. Now, verse 5. We did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel would remain with you. Now, here's Paul and Barnabas and Titus, Paul the ex-Pharisee, Barnabas the Levite, and Titus the full-on Greek.

In spite of all the threatening circumstances there, there were both verbal threats and they got severe. But on top of that, even physical threats. They didn't yield to any of those intense pressures at all. Not even one bit. Whether it was covert, something they could see, or overt. It may even be that Paul meant to include when he said we, Peter and James and John in this we. So there's a whole group of us here. But whichever, one of the things is they stood their ground.

Whatever pressure, once we came out, here's the meeting, we've made a decision, the apostles have said, no, we don't see any reason for you to have to get Titus circumcised. Stay with your gospel. We're right with you. Keep going. And so as they went out from that meeting, he says, Hey, Titus was not compelled. We will stand by the truth of the gospel. We will not yield. We won't knuckle under. Even if they complied for a little while, let's just go through with this just to, you know, get the pressure off and then we'll get on our way. No, that was a problem.

Let's see what was at stake here as we look at the last half of verse 5. So that the truth of the gospel should remain with you. Do you realize what would happen if they had knuckled under? If they had succumbed to the pressure? You see that? The truth of the gospel would not have remained. Paul lays it on the line here. He says, if we do that, you guys are going to just lose it. We would have nothing to stand on. The legalists would be able to come in and say, see, Paul followed this.

Yeah, you guys have to follow the law of Moses all the way. Every jot and fiddle. Cross your eyes and dot your Ts. Every little piece. Even doing the knuckling under, the bowing to the pressure for one moment, just to get past the current pressure and the difficulty. was going to be a problem.

That would threaten the ongoing continuity of the gospel. That would be a problem. This legalism that the legalists were proposing was not to be allowed even for a little bit, or for a little while. So, I'm going to ask the question, is it that big a deal? I mean, they would have gotten a lot of pressure off of them if they just knuckled under. Ah, it's not that big a deal, just pass. So let's answer that.

Next book over from Galatians, Ephesians. Ephesians 2, 5 and 8. We are saved entirely by grace, by grace alone. Once saved, we are dead to sin and alive to God. The message of Romans 6, verse 11 verses and other places, but certainly that. Entirely by grace. The law cannot improve, not even a part of the law can improve upon the gospel of grace. In fact, we are as dead to the law as we are dead to sin.

That's what scripture says, not just once, but in a number of places. And that took place when Christ died on the cross. It's the answer to the question. What happened when Christ died on the cross? That's a part of it. We died to sin. We'll see that when we get a little farther down here in chapter 2. We also died to the law. That's what scripture says.

Think about this for a minute. I offer you a nice pure glass of water. But I give you one little caution. I put a drop of some stuff in it I found out in the barn. You want it? Not so much, okay? Suddenly you're not quite so thirsty, okay? It can be as pure as can be. One little drop is all it takes to make you say, uh-uh, I'm not drinking this.

Christ, when He was on the cross, said, It is finished. As I brought up before, it was an accounting term used for paying off a debt. It is paid off. The debt is entirely paid. It was said and written in what's called the perfect tense, and what that means is a completed action, ongoing results into the future. It implies, unless the context says otherwise, permanence.

So the question is, When Christ says, it is finished, did he mean it is finished? Or does he mean that you still got something to do because it doesn't quite get there? It's not really finished. That's really what's at issue here, isn't it? Is it really, truly, completely finished?

And by the way, it is finished is one word. Real simple. If you have an English, it's three, but Christ just put out one word there from the cross. in a verb tense that said, completely done. The results will go on into eternity. Completely done. Not only can I not add anything to it, I don't need to. There is no need. It's done. He did it all. It is indeed completely, totally finished.

We'll, as we take a Lord's table this morning, we'll remember that, what Christ did when he completely finished. Let's pray. Lord, we thank you as we look at your word, as we look at the things that you have laid out for us. Oh, how thankful we are and can be because of the completeness of what you've done. We needn't add to it. We are instead called to believe it and to depend upon it. The complete work that you accomplished on the cross for the joy set before you. Thank you in Jesus name. Amen.