the Rock gives it up to be a Pillar

becoming the stumbling stone

Galatians 1–2

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another gospel, but there are some who are confusing you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, so now I repeat, if anyone proclaims to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let that one be accursed!

Am I now seeking human approval, or God’s approval? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still pleasing people, I would not be a servant of Christ.

For I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin; for I did not receive it from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

You have heard, no doubt, of my earlier life in Judaism. I was violently persecuting the church of God and was trying to destroy it. I advanced in Judaism beyond many among my people of the same age, for I was far more zealous for the traditions of my ancestors. But when God, who had set me apart before I was born and called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, so that I might proclaim him among the Gentiles, I did not confer with any human being, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were already apostles before me, but I went away at once into Arabia, and afterwards I returned to Damascus.

Then after three years I did go up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days; but I did not see any other apostle except James the Lord’s brother. In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie! Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, and I was still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea that are in Christ; they only heard it said, “The one who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming the faith he once tried to destroy.” And they glorified God because of me.

Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up in response to a revelation. Then I laid before them (though only in a private meeting with the acknowledged leaders) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure that I was not running, or had not run, in vain. But even Titus, who was with me, was not compelled to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. But because of false believers secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might enslave us—we did not submit to them even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might always remain with you. And from those who were supposed to be acknowledged leaders (what they actually were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—those leaders contributed nothing to me. On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel for the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel for the circumcised (for he who worked through Peter making him an apostle to the circumcised also worked through me in sending me to the Gentiles), and when James and Cephas and John, who were acknowledged pillars, recognized the grace that had been given to me, they gave to Barnabas and me the right hand of fellowship, agreeing that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. They asked only one thing, that we remember the poor, which was actually what I was eager to do.

But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood self-condemned; for until certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But after they came, he drew back and kept himself separate for fear of the circumcision faction. And the other Jews joined him in this hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not acting consistently with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?”

We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; yet we know that a person is justified not by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by doing the works of the law, because no one will be justified by the works of the law. But if, in our effort to be justified in Christ, we ourselves have been found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! But if I build up again the very things that I once tore down, then I demonstrate that I am a transgressor. For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing.

Moisés Silva, IVP New Bible Commentary

The apostle was moved to write the letter because the Galatians were in the process of deserting the gospel.

Well, sort of. Yes, Paul is astonished that they are deserting the gospel, but that takes just two verses. The rest of the chapter, and the one following, are about the slanderous accusations that he had deserted the gospel! How did Silva miss this?

What Paul is actually upset about is that people were saying that what he was preaching to the Galatians was not how we was acting once he was away from them, that he was not one of the true apostles and was actually under their tutelage, and worse: that he was a bit of a groupie: wanting to hang around with the big kids because he was so awestruck by them. And so the Galatians should follow the Big Three and not Paul because they had been with Christ, knew better what the Gospel really was, and were much more important.

Paul is upset not just because the Galatians wanted to pervert the gospel by submitting to the Law, but that they were doing it because of him! The Galatians were being told that it was okay for them to do it because Paul did it too—once he was away from them—and actually even preached that circumcision was still required. The slander was that Paul was telling them one thing but then talking quite differently once he was in the company of Peter and James and John (the Pillars, whom he idolized).

The reason Silva misses this is probably because he (actually, almost no one) doesn’t want to publicize the acrimony that existed between Paul and the others. And it was acrimony. Paul was criticized, trivialized and marginalized. The others followed behind, undoing his work as he left one place to go to another. Yes, possibly in later years Peter came around a bit, but not enough. Paul had no firm supporter his entire life, and when he was in prison they all stayed away. No one came to his defense.

Certain Jewish Christians had begun to visit the churches he had established. Their purpose was to ‘Judaize’ these Gentile believers; to persuade them that they must take an additional step and become Jews through circumcision.

True, to a point. Paul brings up the Jerusalem Council to provide evidence that this issue had already been dealt with, and the decision of the Pillars was that the Gentiles didn’t have to be circumcised. But he goes this distance only with great care. He specifically says he went to the meeting because of a revelation, not because he was summoned by the Pillars.

It is likely that Paul’s outrage in v 10 (Am I now seeking human approval, or am I trying to please people?) is a reaction to how people were twisting what actually happened: that Paul attended because he was ordered to, that he was not important enough to be part of the discussion but was informed of the Council’s decision after they finished, that he was appointed a messenger boy to deliver the Council’s decision, and that everyone knew he was an inferior: a late-comer who was nowhere near as important as those who had walked with Christ (and certainly nothing compared to James, the physical brother of Christ) and a second-generation apostle who depended upon them for everything. In short, Paul was the lesser of them and was mesmerized by their greatness. He was told to appear before them, was not important enough to be invited into the committee but was only informed of their decision, and was then appointed as their messenger. And why? Because he was eager to be included with the true leaders, submissive to their will, and qualified only to be their delivery boy.

And so Paul lashes out. You can hear his voice rising and his emotions at their end when he cries, “Before God, I do not lie!” This was desperately important for him. We miss the point badly when we look at Paul’s argument calmly. He was upset. He was yelling.

Yes, he went to Jerusalem, but not because he was instructed by them to appear. Yes, they discussed the issue of circumcision, but he had an uncircumcised believer with him and no one suggested that he be circumcised. Yes, the Pillars were there, and it was their decision but they had contributed nothing to him. Yes, some the people attending advocated circumcision, but they were spies and not even true believers. Yes, the Gentile churches were discussed, but the Pillars were the ones to came to Paul’s point of view, not he to theirs, and in the end their only request was that he remember the poor, which really wasn’t a request at all because the fact that he loved the Gentiles did not mean he hated the Jews. Yes, he spent time with the other apostles, but only a couple of them and only for brief periods. Yes, he knows all about the Pillars, but he is not awestruck by them and in fact has confronted the greatest of them in public, shaming him for building up the very things that he should be tearing down and for making Christ’s death of no account. And—although he is unwilling to name names—he wishes them all accursed if they continue preaching this gospel which is not really a gospel at all.

It is not the “Judaizers” who are his problem: it is the Pillars! The Judaizers are nothing: just wasps to swat at. But the Pillars—Peter, James and John—they carry weight. When they pervert the gospel people listen: Peter being the most obvious example. The very people who should have been the leaders have instead settled for being in the limelight. The very people who knew Christ best now know so little of his heart. The very ones who were charged with taking the gospel to the world (Peter and John anyway; James was self-appointed) are now standing in the way.

His previous life demonstrates the need he had for a drastic conversion. Only a divine, gracious intervention can explain the change that came over him.

No. Paul talks about his pre-conversion life to confirm that he has nothing to do with these people: not before, not after, not now, not ever. He wasn’t with them at any time and never will be... at least if they keep acting like this.

No doubt, the Judaizers were spreading stories to the effect that he had sat under the drawn-out instruction of the Jerusalem apostles as a disciple would normally do under a rabbi.

Yes, but that is only part of the point. The Judaizers could claim that Paul had been instructed by the Pillars in order to have the Galatians believe that his message was no different, but no different from what? The Judaizers? No! Peter! This is vitally important and Silva has missed it. The only currency the Judaizers can get from such a claim is that the churches should believe them because they were sent by James and Peter is also an ally. Peter and James are believable because they have the stature. Paul is a latecomer who sat under their instruction and is not to be regarded as anything special: he’s only one of their students who has apparently not gotten their teachings right and how has gone a bit haywire.

And so Paul wants to make it clear that the people who are causing problems in the church—the Pillars!—are, and always have been, the problem. Paul has never been with them, except for a short period of a couple weeks, and not for the purpose of instruction but for the purpose of meeting face-to-face to confirm the boundaries of their respective areas of work. But now, when they are not face-to-face with him, they change their spots and work, not only against him, but contrary to what they been already agreed. And Paul, when he finally does meet one of them face-to-face (he calls him Cephas: his BC name) announces to him, and everyone else, publicly, that he is a hypocrite!

The problem is not a group of Judaizers that war against Paul and the Pillars. The problem is the Pillars. Paul did not call out the Judaizers: he called out Peter. Peter is not living as Christ insists he must. God told him personally and directly that nothing is unclean and he is willing to do that: he can live outside the dietary restrictions. But he can go no further. He cannot let Jews see him doing it, and he certainly cannot go the distance Paul has gone: that the Jews are no more righteous than Gentiles; that the Gentiles are no greater sinners than Jews. And so the Judaizers have free reign because no one stands against them. Peter, who should be calling the Judaizers to task, instead becomes one of them when they show up. The Pillars, who should stand for Christ, instead just stand in the way.

In contrast to the claims of the Judaizers, the fact is that the Three did not impose changes on his ministry and message.

Silva acquits the Three because they didn’t impose any changes on Paul?! How magnificent of him! And them. The true contrast is not between the Three and the Judaizers but between the Three and Paul, because there was no contrast to be drawn between the Three and the Judaizers. For Silva to find something laudatory in the Three for not imposing any changes on Paul is bizarre. Why should Paul make any changes?! He was the only one doing what Christ demanded! It was the Three who needed to change. And radically.

Silva is so blinded by the importance of the Three that he refuses to see the problem. They were woefully out of step with God’s plans for the Church. If the Twelve had done their job, there would have been no need for Paul. And so since Paul was necessary to get the Gospel to the Gentiles, he was also necessary to keep at arm’s length those who interfered. The fact that Peter should have gone but didn’t now puts him on the other side. Paul diplomatically says that Peter’s territory is Jerusalem, but that is only a recognition of how things had turned out, not how they should have been. And now, because they are Jerusalemites they cannot stand Paul saying things in the outlying territories that cause problems for them. They are Jerusalemites not just in locale, but in ideology. And so they come to Paul, to reign him in, to make him like them. If Paul had not resisted them, they would have prevented the church from ever developing.

Paul rightly says are of no importance, and he is living proof of it: he shouldn’t even exist. But they proclaim their self-importance and everyone—even Silva—believes them!

The Jerusalem Council was an embarrassment. The fact that their pronouncement did nothing to change Paul’s ministry does not excuse them. The Council declared the Gentiles second-class Christians. It announced that the Jews were still being firmly entrenched as the people of God, with the Gentiles subservient to their decision on who and what was acceptable to God. James, in his decision, says this:

I have reached the decision that we should not trouble those Gentiles who are turning to God, but we should write to them to abstain only from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from whatever has been strangled and from blood.

First, who died and made James boss?! Who gave him the right to make any decision about how the work of God is done? He certainly wasn’t the shining example for anyone who claims to be a follower of Christ. Seriously: what one thing did James do that ever exemplified the example or demands of Christ? He was woefully out of step.

Second, why does James call them “those Gentiles”? Paul calls them brothers and sisters, saints, beloved, children of God, heirs, friends, and children of the promise. James obviously has no intention of elevating them to the position of full-blood brothers. To James, they were Gentiles, and it was the Jews who had the priority. That’s understandable you say? The Jews had been the people of God for centuries, so taking this sharp turn was going to take a while. We have to give the Jews time to adjust to this new arrangement, right? Wrong. Paul is the proof that it didn’t take time. It wasn’t a matter of adjusting; it was a matter of obedience. The disciples didn’t have to work this thing out in their minds: they were refusing to do what God had explicitly told them to do. They had no right to do it halfheartedly or to allow their prejudices in. They were the ones that Jesus personally selected (except for James) and if they weren’t going to do it, who would? It was deadly serious stuff. While the Jews were taking time to adjust, the Gentiles were being denied the gospel. While the Jews protected their sensitivities the Gentiles were left exposed. While they insisted on privilege for themselves they denied privilege for everyone else.

It is the Jonah story. The Jews couldn’t imagine a situation where were expected to take the word of God to the Gentiles. The Gentiles were supposed to come to them. Jesus told the disciples to go, God told Peter in as clear terms as possible that nothing was unclean, and still he balked. And when Paul came in with no prejudices and no self interest, when they saw that there was one who was doing it as Jesus said they must, they still resisted, and worse: they interfered. Simon, son of Jonah, might have thought this way, but not Peter, the rock.

(Jesus told the disciples that “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. If two of you agree, it will be done for you.” Were the Three banking on this: that the three of them agreeing fulfilled this promise and so their decision was final because it was grounded in the teachings of Christ? Whether or not that was in their minds, it is interesting that in Matthew 18 Jesus’ teaching about “binding” comes immediately after his teachings about children and the lost sheep. Whatever Jesus meant by binding and loosing, it certainly could not have included obstructing the Gospel.)

Paul said he would never do anything to interfere with someone’s relationship with Christ: “Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God.” The others demeaned the clear message of the gospel because—and here’s the real reason—it was too difficult. It was too physically, emotionally, and religiously fearful and painful. They couldn’t leave the comforts of their homes, country, and beliefs. Paul called it all rubbish. They couldn’t. And since it wasn’t rubbish, but valuable, they protected it.

Third, by declaring that they are to observe the Noachic laws James demotes them from brothers to resident aliens. Of the three classifications that the Jews had for Gentiles (proselyte, God-fearer, and resident alien) this is the lowest. The Noachic Law was for Gentiles residing within Israel: they were required to observe basic pre-Abrahamic, pre-Mosaic laws of decency so as to not offend the Jew. In his pronouncement James tacitly brings all Gentile churches under the thumb of the Jew, and then humiliates them by declaring them just one step above unbelievers: “our expectation is that you be good Gentiles”. By doing so he does two things: he confirms their subservience and lets the Jews know that nothing has changed: the Gentiles are still only resident aliens.

And last, why should the Gentiles be placed under any restriction at all? What did they do wrong? Believe in Christ? If James wants to fix something, fix the Jews! They were the ones in the wrong. Yet he says nothing to them and instead tells the Gentiles to do nothing to offend the Jews.

What nonsense! The children are instructed to be careful to not offend the adults! The weak are told to bear the prejudices of the strong!

Of course the reason James does this ridiculous thing is that he doesn’t care what the Gentiles think and he cares a lot what the Jews think. The Gentiles are of no importance, so if he chastens them he is off the hook, because no one, Jew or Gentile, is going to complain. But, if he acts like Paul, if he accepts the Gentiles as equals, then of course the Jews would be outraged. But James is not Paul. James will never do anything to offend the Jews.

Why? Because he’s afraid of them? No. Because he’s one of them.

When the apostles and the elders compose their letter they expose their grudging acceptance of the Gentile believers:

The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the believers of Gentile origin in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. Since we have heard that certain persons who have gone out from us, though with no instructions from us, have said things to disturb you and have unsettled your minds, we have decided unanimously to choose representatives and send them to you, along with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, who have risked their lives for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ.

We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to impose on you no further burden than these essentials: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.

Why does the Council call them “believers of Gentile origin”? Could there be a less friendly greeting than this? And then they impose this bizarre obligation around them: that if they observe basic standards of decency, then the Council will impose no other burden on them.

Why don’t they tell the truth: that this has nothing to do with Christ? Why don’t they warn these new brothers and sisters, like Paul did, that if they listen to this nonsense Christ will be of no benefit to them? When Paul says that if the Galatians follow Jewish laws they will fall from grace, is it imaginable that if they follow pre-Jewish laws they will do better?!

(This is a good example of how we cannot believe everything a disciple or apostle said just because they are a disciple or apostle. The Twelve were often desperately wrong (how much more so the twelve sons of Jacob!). To think they somehow magically got it right after they were given the Spirit is a bit silly. If they couldn’t get it right while Christ was with them, how were they suddenly infallible when he wasn’t with them? Where would the church be if we imposed no burden on new converts other than to “abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication”? Can you imagine what kind of church we would have if that was still our instruction and expectation? The Jerusalem Council’s ruling had nothing to do with the Holy Spirit. We would not “do well” to follow these instructions. The policy they decreed was wrong for the churches then and is wrong for the churches now.)

Instead of “these essentials”, they could have offered (like Paul) true spiritual guidance. Instead of lecturing the Gentiles, they should have sent a letter to the Jews, telling them to stop harassing these new converts to Christ. “Occasions for stumbling are bound to come, but woe to anyone by whom they come!”

They had no intention of asking to Jews to take a step back because they did not regard the Gentiles as equals, did not believe circumcision was wrong, and thought Paul was going too far. In short, they could not extract themselves from their belief that physical descendance from Abraham determined who were (and weren’t) the people of God, that the Law was incumbent upon all true believers, and that Temple worship was the highest form of worship—and was off-limits to the Gentiles.

Paul accepted the Council’s decision, not because it was correct, but because it was the quickest way to get back to work. Nothing more could be expected of them. He was relieved just to have the Pillars leave the Gentile believers alone.

In the end, none of them, not one, would grant a Gentile equal standing with the Jew. No Gentile would ever be good enough without going the whole way. They could be “believers of Gentile origin”, but without submitting to circumcision and observing the Sabbath and dietary laws they would never be truly accepted because, as everyone knows, the only good Gentile is a Jew.

Why did Christ appear to Paul on the road to Damascus? If he already had the Twelve (and the Three) why did he need Paul? Because they were not doing what they were told. They would never go. They would stay Jews. They would never speak the gospel in its purity.

God was not calling for an “adjustment” in Jewish beliefs. It required nothing less than what Paul was saying: that in Christ, there is no Jew or Gentile. Yes, it was difficult, but the disciples—who were supposed to proclaim this “good news”—were choking on the gospel rather than proclaiming it.

And for them to say that Paul was leading a double life, preaching one thing when he was with the Gentiles but doing another when he was with the Jews, was unconscionable. There was no excuse for that. The truth was staring them in the face. The truth was being preached.

It’s one thing to not do it, but to interfere with those who do is a dreadfully serious matter. Paul says:

Even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!

Paul doesn’t directly name the Three, but the inference is clear: no matter who it is, no matter how important they claim to be, no one—not even an angel from heaven (are the Three higher than that?)—can pervert the gospel and expect to walk away unscathed. They will pay, because this Jesus, who they are saying died for nothing, is in heaven, waiting. And everyone will stand before him to be judged for what they have done.

No matter who they are.