Galatians 2:1-10 and the Jerusalem Synod of Acts 15

Galatians 2:1-10 and the Jerusalem Synod of Acts 15

Our working theme for Galatians: “Grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, as taught in Scripture alone, to the glory of God alone”

CHARTING THE COURSE FOR THIS STUDY

GALATIANS 2:1-10 AND THE JERUSALEM SYNOD OF ACTS 15

Is Galatians 2:1-10 the Jerusalem Synod of Acts 15?

TWO MAIN ISSUES:

C. K. Barrett has referred to this issue as “the most celebrated and complicated historical problem in the whole epistle—perhaps in the whole of the New Testament” (Freedom and Obligation, 10).

1. Date when Galatians was written:

a. Was Galatians written before Acts 15?

b. Was Galatians written after Acts 15?

2. How do we assess the biographical information Paul gives in Galatians with the account Luke gives in Acts?

a. Does Paul mention in Galatians every visit he made to Jerusalem?

b. The book of Acts gives five of Paul’s visits to Jerusalem:

i. Post-conversion visit (Acts 9:26–30//Galatians 1:18-20)

ii. Famine relief visit (Acts 11:30)

iii. Jerusalem Synod (Acts 15:1–30)

iv. Acts 18:22 (not relevant to discussion because Paul was no longer with Barnabas and Galatians 2:1 says that Paul went with Barnabas).

v. Arrest visit (Acts 21:15–17)

c. If Galatians was written before Acts 15 then Gal.2:1-10 is probably to be correlated with Acts 11:27-30; 12:25.

d. If Galatians was written after Acts 15 then Galatians 2:1-10 probably correlates with Acts 15:2-29.

SCENARIO I: GALATIANS 2 = ACTS 11:27-30; 12:25

ADVOCATES OF SCENARIO I ANSWER THE TWO MAIN ISSUES BY SAYING:

1. Galatians was written before Acts 15.

2. Paul’s autobiographical information in Galatians 2 corresponds with Acts 11:27-30; 12:25.

Strengths of Scenario I

1. Identifies the Judaizers of Acts 15:1,5 all the more strongly with the false teachers in Galatians. This would also mean that Paul was writing to the churches of Southern Galatia of which we have Luke’s record in Acts 13:13-14:28 (Paul didn’t visit the region of northern Galatia until after Acts 15).

2. Gives an explanation as to why Paul doesn’t mention the decrees of the Jerusalem Synod saying it hadn’t happened yet.

Problems with Scenario I

1. “Galatians 2 deals with the question whether or not the Gentiles who turn to Christ must be circumcised; Acts 11, 12 describes a relief mission, and (in the section referred to) says nothing about circumcision.” (Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, Vol. 8: New Testament commentary: Exposition of Galatians, p.72). We might also add that nothing is said of Paul’s receiving the right hand of fellowship.

2. “In Acts 11:27–30; 12:25 it is Barnabas who takes the lead (note “Barnabas and Saul” in 11:30 and 12:25). In Gal. 2 Barnabas has no such priority (see verses 2:1, 6, 8, 9)” (Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, Vol. 8: New Testament commentary: Exposition of Galatians, p.72).

SCENARIO II: GALATIANS 2:1-10 = ACTS 15:2-29

ADVOCATES OF SCENARIO II ANSWER THE TWO MAIN ISSUES BY SAYING:

1. Galatians was written after Acts 15.

2. Paul’s autobiographical information in Galatians 2 corresponds with Acts 15:2-29.

Strengths of Scenario II

1. Moises Silva points out that the features shared by both passages argue that the same event is being discussed: the same places (Antioch and Jerusalem); the same people; the same relative time; the same format; the same issue; the same mood; the same result, “A combination of circumstances so striking is not likely to have occurred twice within a few years” (Lightfoot, quoted by Silva, 135).

Problems with Scenario II

1. “In Acts 15 Paul and Barnabas are sent as part of an official delegation from the church at Antioch to resolve a dispute introduced into their congregation by intruders from Judea. In Gal 2:2, however, Paul himself, prompted by a divine revelation, takes the initiative for the meeting.” (Timothy George, New American Commentary, 136).

2. “The council of Acts 15 was clearly a public meeting involving lengthy discussions and presentations addressed to the whole assembly by Peter, Paul, Barnabas, and James. By contrast, the conference of Gal 2:1-10 was carried on in private conversation among the principal leaders.” (Timothy George, New American Commentary, 136).

3. No decrees are mentioned in Galatians 2, while decrees were mentioned in Acts 15. Only one “demand” was placed upon Paul in Galatians 2:10 – remembering the poor. In Acts 15, the Synod declared that Gentiles abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication (Acts 15:29).

4. Why does Paul omit his visit in Acts 11:27-30; 12:25 in the autobiography he gives in Galatians 1-2? “Paul’s argument in Galatians hinges upon his frankness in confessing the total extent of his visits to the Jerusalem apostles. The omission of a visit, even if it were unimportant, would arouse suspicion” (Hemer quoted by Ronald Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians, p.23).

CONCLUSION

A. Paul does not give his biography for the purpose of our comparing it with the book of Acts. Nor does Luke write the book of Acts so that we can compare his account with Paul’s autobiography in Galatians.

B. Paul’s biography serves the two main purposes of:

1. Establishing his apostolic authority.

a. Paul’s Gospel and apostolic ministry did not come from men.

b. The leaders of Jerusalem agreed that Paul’s Gospel and commission came from Christ.

c. Paul preached the Gospel to Peter (2:11-21)!

2. Establishing that we are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone to the glory of God alone.

C. While it is unwise to be dogmatic on this issue, I believe the evidence favors Galatians being written after Acts 15.

FINAL QUESTION: If Galatians was written after Acts 15, how could the Judaizers have maintained a foothold opposing Paul? Why didn’t Paul appeal to the decisions of the Jerusalem Synod?

1. Paul taught in accord with Acts 15 saying that circumcision was not a necessary requirement for Gentile converts to Christianity (see Acts 15:1,5,22).

a. The Judaizers tried compelling Titus to be circumcised (Gal.2:3).

b. It is likely, but not certain that Titus went to Jerusalem with Paul. If he did go, then Titus went uncircumcised and left Jerusalem uncircumcised with the blessings of James and Cephas and John (Gal.2:1-3,7-9).

2. Paul taught in accord with the Synod of Jerusalem that we are saved by grace through faith (Acts 15:8-11; Galatians 2:16).

3. The Judaizers may have disputed Paul’s teaching and interpretation of the Synod’s decision. They could have pointed out that the Jerusalem Synod directed the Gentiles to observe certain food laws and nothing was explicitly said in the Synod’s letter about circumcision (Acts 15:20,23-29).

4. The foot/stranglehold of the Judaizers was strengthened by the hypocrisy of Peter and others (Gal.2:11-13).

SO WHAT? WHY SPEND SO MUCH TIME ON THIS ISSUE?

A. The interpretation of the letter is not fundamentally affected based upon our dating of Galatians before or after Acts 15.

B. Our study of the issue should affect our view of Peter’s behavior and remind us that while the message of the Gospel is straightforward, the implications of the Gospel are profound in application.

1. 15 years after Pentecost, Peter was able to preach and live out the Gospel in such a way so as not to offend the Judaizers.

2. Paul was unable to preach and live out the Gospel in such a way as to please the Judaizers (Gal.2:2-5).

a. Peter and Paul preached the same message of grace through faith and were in fundamental agreement over the Gospel (cf. Acts 15:7-12).

b. Peter gave his “amen” to Paul and the right hand of fellowship (Gal.2:7-9).

“That all the apostles preached the same gospel of grace we may be sure, but whether there were any differences in the articulation of that message and in the understanding of its implications is another question altogether…It is true enough that a fundamental unity characterized the preaching of all the apostles. But it is no less true that each of them, according to their diverse gifts and backgrounds, articulated that message in different ways. And it is especially true that Paul was given a particular mission that perhaps only he, under God’s direction, could fulfill” (Silva, 152,155).

c. Yet Paul continued to face severe opposition but Peter did not (see 2 Cor.10:13-18; Phil.3:2; Titus 1:10). Why?

i. In Antioch, Paul finally found out what the difference was between his Gospel and Peter’s.

ii. Peter was not living out the implications of the Gospel as was Paul (Gal.2:11-21).

ü Peter didn’t understand the implications of the Gospel for Gentiles in Acts 10.

ü It was evident to Paul that Peter did not understand the implications of the Gospel in Antioch (Gal.2:11-21).

3. Peter’s hypocritical methodology indicated a faulty theology (see Gal.1:11; “the gospel which is preached by me”).

a. Peter’s faulty theology is outlined by Paul in Gal.2:18-21.

b. It was Peter’s faulty methodology and theology that led Paul to emphasize that he was independent of the other apostles (Gal.1:1,11-12,17-19; 2:6-10).