Battle Galatia : Mission 'Gospel Preservation'

In Galatians 2:1-10 there are some rather interesting goings on… Paul seems to be in the middle of making sure that the Galatians know about his authentic, God revealed message… But then it seems that Paul wants to check that his message is actually the correct one… that he “hadn’t run in vain”… it seems odd to say this, particularly after he’s been so clear in chapter 1 to ensure the Galatians know just how separate he has been from the other apostles…

Has Paul now lost confidence in his message… does he now need to head to Jerusalem to check that his message is actually the correct one?

I think that Galatians 2:1-10 offers completely the opposite view to that… I think that these verses should give us great confidence in Paul’s message. But to do that, we need to think about placing the Galatian letter correctly in Paul’s itinerary.

Verse 2: “[Paul] went up [to Jerusalem] because of a revelation and set before them… the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain.” So what sends Paul to Jerusalem?

A bit of cross referencing to Acts can help us answer this – let’s have a look at the highlights:
Acts 9:1-19 – Paul’s conversion
Acts 9:19 – Paul is in Damascus
Acts 9:26 – Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem, meets some of the apostles
Acts 9:30 – Paul heads to Caesarea and heads to Tarsus
Acts 11:25 – Barnabas heads to Tarsus to get Paul, to bring him back to Antioch
Acts 11:28 – revelation of a great famine
Acts 11:29 – disciples decide to send relief to brothers in Judea
Acts 11:30 – relief is sent to Judea by the hand of Paul and Barnabas (Paul’s 2nd visit to J’slm)
Acts 1312:25 – Paul and Barnabas return to Antioch from Jerusalem
Acts 13:2 – revelation of Paul and Barnabas being set apart
Acts 13:1-3: Paul heads from Crete to Antioch Pisidia
Acts 13:48-49 – Gentiles becoming Christian in the whole region
Acts 14:24-26 – Paul heads back to Antioch Syria
Acts 15:2-3 – Paul heads to Jerusalem to the council (Paul’s 3rd visit to J’slm)
Acts 15:22 – letter from the Jerusalem Council gets spread around
Acts 15:30-31 – letter received with massive encouragement

If we look through Galatians 1 – Paul wants to make clear that he has had no (or minimal) contact with the other apostles in Jerusalem. Gal 1:16-17, Paul stresses that after his conversion, he didn’t immediately consult, or go to Jerusalem, but went to Damascus (Acts9:19). Gal 1:18, then after 3 years, Paul visits Jerusalem, to see the apostles Cephas and James (Acts9:26). We then see Paul in Gal 1:21 head off to Syria and Cilcia (Acts9:30). Then in Gal 2:1 we learn that after 14 years, Paul goes up to Jerusalem again.

So, Paul’s visit to Jerusalem in Gal 2:1 seems to be his second visit (i.e. that of Acts 11:30). Afterall, Paul’s emphasis in chapter 1 so far has been to make it clear just how “untouched” his Gospel has been from other apostles so why would he miss out a whole visit to Jerusalem from his itinerary in Galatians… it would make his case so flimsy that it’s basically destroyed. More than this, if the letter to the Galatians is to show them exactly how circumcision/the law fits in now Jesus has come, then why wouldn’t he just refer to the letter from the Jerusalem Council in his letter to the Galatians… there is no mention of it whatsoever. I guess that some might argue that Gal 2:1-10 is indeed that Jerusalem Council meeting, in which case I might still argue that Paul doesn’t really rely on the Council letter to persuade the Galatians, which seems a bit odd… but also the confrontation between Paul and Peter wouldn’t then fit in with the Jerusalem letter being issued… but also, we’re back to the chapter 1 argument – why would Paul miss out an early visit to Jerusalem, if he’s trying to persuade the Galatians that his Gospel has been untouched by those in Jerusalem.

If we run with this thinking, then the revelation that takes Paul to Jerusalem must be that of Acts 11:28 – the great famine that’s coming… so now we see how the potentially disjointed verse 10 fits in with Paul’s argument. When Paul and those who are influential agree to go their “separate” ways, i.e. proclaiming to the Jews and proclaiming to the Gentiles, then it would fit well that the brothers in Jerusalem are eager for Paul to still remember the Judean church/brothers in need – Gentiles financially supporting Jews is a big deal… and shows the “oneness” of the new church – Jew and Gentile together as one church, therefore aiding and supporting one another! It’s a big deal to Paul (Gal 2:10)! The aid symbolises much (cf Romans 15:24-27 where Paul takes a massive detour in order to take aid to Jerusalem believers – aid given by Gentile believers).

This then leaves us with a question. What does Paul mean in verse 2:2 by “in order to make sure I was not running in vain or had not run in vain.”?

Well, we’ve seen in chapter 1 that Paul is far from lacking confidence in his message as he’s been well keen for the Galatians to know the revelation he received from God has been untouched! So I don’t think Paul is checking whether his message is true or not in terms of “having run in vain with the wrong message”.

Verse 3 is helpful: “But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek”… It’s another verse that just seems to stick out in 2:1-10.

So, Paul confident of his message, is concerned of the message being proclaimed in Jerusalem… with all this false teaching going around, he wanted to ensure that the false teachers were not undoing all of Paul’s work… i.e. people turning to a different Gospel, and so Paul having “run in vain” as a result of people shifting from the gospel that he proclaims. He affirms then, verse 3, that Titus didn’t need to be circumcised (a confirmation that the brothers in Jerusalem haven’t been taken in by the false teaching) and then, verse 9 – they offer the right hand of fellowship.

So, rather than us losing confidence in Paul’s message because of what he writes in 2:1-10, I hope instead that it gives us great confidence in Paul’s message… that it has been untouched by the apostles and yet after about 14 years, his message (revealed from God) matches up with the apostles message… Paul’s message is confirmed as authentic, the real deal!

So the result of all this helps us understand the context into which Paul is writing… there’s false teaching abounding… the Galatians seem to be taken in by it… (and we see later in 2:11-14 that after Paul’s visit to Jerusalem, even those that are “pillars” have now been taken in by it)! But Paul’s about to head off to the Jerusalem Council to discuss exactly how the law now fits in now Jesus has come… and he doesn’t know what the outcome of this council will be (it’s not a simple debate, Acts 15:2, and even Peter has been taken in Gal 2:11-12).

So in 1:1 - 2:10, before the Galatians receive the currently unknown result of the Jerusalem Council and the false teachers are still in their area, Paul wants the Galatians to know:

1. his gospel is the genuine article (revealed by God) and has remained untouched (matches up with the apostles message despite minimal contact between them over 14years)
2. he’ll stand by it, against false brothers, opposition and those who seem to be “pillars”

All things online...

Things have slowly been changing in my online "world". Firstly, I recently jumped across from IE to Firefox - my word why didn't I do that earlier. Then today I signed up on Twitter... not coz I'm sold on the idea but because I think it's better to give something a go before dissing it completely... we shall see... it may well help re-ignite something that's gone cold.... my blogging!

I haven't been posting much since changing job... and starting work for the church was the main reason why I started blogging in the first place... I'm not too sure why I haven't. Maybe because evening/weekend times I now try to keep much freer that previously - trying to draw some definite lines between "work" and "rest" and so I've switched off more so which perhaps has led to a lack of posting... that might be healthy thinking, or laziness... or some combination of the two - still trying to work out what a Mark 8:34 ministry looks like.

Anyhow... let's see how it goes!

Leaving your Christianity at the work-place door

Yes... it's been a while!!!

Yesterday the news was reporting the leak of a list of contact details of members of the BNP (British Nationalist Party). Nick Griffin was quoted saying “anyone should be allowed to be in any job as long as they leave their politics at the work place door”. In the letter of ‘regret’ about the leak, Nick quotes an external source stating that there is no reason why “BNP members cannot be teachers, provided they leave their politics at the school gates”

How easy is that do you think? Can you become a neutral person, just by entering a building? Can you leave your core values at the school gate? Is it even fair to be asked to do so?

The BNP’s Mission Statement is “to secure a future for the indigenous peoples of these islands in the North Atlantic which have been our homeland for millennia”. (Indigenous, according to the BNP, means “the people whose ancestors were the earliest settlers here after the last great Ice Age and which have been complemented by the historic migrations from mainland Europe.”) …

It continues “Increasingly our people are facing denial of service provision, failure to secure business contracts as well as poor job prospects as both reverse discrimination excludes our people from the school room, workplace and boardroom. A key role of the British National Party is to provide legal advice and support to victims of repression and those denied their fundamental civil rights.”

This leads to the following stances:
Immigration: ensure native British people will not become an ethnic minority (by calling immediate halts to immigration, deporting criminal and illegal immigrants, offering generous financial incentives for immigrants to return to their lands of ethnic origin)
Economy: selective exclusion of foreign-made goods to British markets, ensuring manufactured goods are, wherever possible, produced in British factories, employing British workers

So, can people really put such ingrained views to one side? Is that a lack of passion to the cause? Does it lead to a dichotomy of belief versus action, particularly in the work place?

James (2:18) would say “Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works”. Belief and action go hand-in-hand… one goes to show the other.

So it is not possible to leave your politics, your core values, your principles, your belief, at the office-door or school-gate, for such things cannot be forgotten, and such things must be acted upon.

So is “anyone can be in any job, as long as they leave their politics at the work place door” a fair statement? I think not. It feels like a bad state of society today, where we are so shallow and fickle in our beliefs… that we can even suggest that we are to, or even can, leave our politics, or our religion, at the work place door.

A Long Awaited Gospel...

Talk I gave on Mark 1:1-15 for Imperial Christian Union, 16 October 2008

A Long Awaited Gospel.mp3

or try downloading from this location

Calling Christian Leaders

John Stott’s “Calling Christian Leaders” is a very helpful set of short chapters, teaching from 1 Corinthians 1-4.

In chapter 1, looking at 1 Corinthians 1:1-17, Stott shows us the ambiguity of the church, that the church today: is sanctified, yet still sinful, and called to be holy (v2, v11); is enriched, yet still defective as it longs for the return of Christ (v5-8); is united, yet still divided (v10-17).

Chapter 2 get us into 1 Corinthians 1:18-2:5, showing how power is to be found in weakness, when it comes to Christian leadership. A weak message, of Christ crucified (yet the powerful way God saves), a weak preacher (that faith might not rest on man’s wisdom, but on God’s power), reaching weak, foolish, lowly people (that the glory would rest with God, not proud, arrogant man)…

Stott then goes on to look at 1 Corinthians 2:6-16, being concerned to show us here the relationship between the Holy Spirit and Scripture. Stott helpfully brings out 4 stages: that the Spirit searches, knowing even the deep things of God (v10); the Spirit reveals God’s salvation to the apostles (biblical authors) (v12); the Spirit inspires the apostles (biblical authors) to communicate God’s salvation to others (v13); the Spirit enlightens those who read the message (v13-16). It’s a call for the Christian leader to humble himself. To humble himself before Scripture, and study it diligently, but in absolute dependence on the Spirit, without whom, our hearts will remain dull, cloudy, deaf and blind.

The penultimate chapter concerns itself with 1 Corinthians 3, and Stott expands the three analogies that Paul uses to describe the church: God’s field (v5-9), God’s building (v9-16) and God’s temple (v16-17). Stott shows us how Christian leaders have nothing to boast about - it is only God who makes things grow; that Christian leaders mustn’t move on from Christ crucified, the foundation of the church, and the way a solid, durable church is built (not with the cheap, perishable teaching of the world); the Christian leaders mustn’t forget what the church is – “it may (in our view) consist of uneducated, unclean, unattractive people. And the congregation may be small and immature and factious. Nevertheless, it is the church of God, His dwelling place by His Spirit, and needs to be treated as such.” The chapter totally downplays the Christian leaders, as God the Father gives the growth, God the Son is its only foundation, and it is the dwelling place of God the Spirit.

Finally, Stott finishes with a look at 1 Corinthians 4. A particularly challenging chapter on who, or what, Christian leaders must be like: servants of Christ (v1); stewards of revelation (v1-2); the scum of the earth (v8-13); fathers of the church family (v14-21). That which underlines each of these 4 is humility, humility before Christ – whose subordinates we are; humility before Scripture – of which we are stewards; humility before the world – whose opposition we are bound to encounter; humility before the congregation – whose members we are to love and serve.

There’s a real challenge to our thinking in v8-13, as Stott gets us into some tough verses on what Christian leadership is like… heading to death in the amphitheatre, the scum of the earth, the refuse of the world, thirsty and hungry. Stott helpfully gets these verses under our skin… “..the difficulty we have in applying this text to ourselves may indicate how far we have drifted from the New Testament. True, the persecution of Christians is increasing in some (especially Hindu and Muslim) cultures. Yet most of use are not cursed, persecuted or slandered. Today, even in a non-Christian, pluralist or secular culture, it is still regarded as quite respectable even honourable to be an ordained clergyman. … but it is not everywhere thus, and it should certainly not be taken for granted. I think we need to listen again to the words of Jesus: ‘Woe to you when all men speak well of you’ (Luke 6:26). Beware, I beg of you, of the temptation to be a popular preacher! I doubt if it is possible to be popular and faithful at the same time.”

A Gospel Chat leaving me with more questions than answers

I’d like to think more about something that happened this evening… any comments gratefully received…

Me and a mate went for a drink after work, catching up about the summer… at the end of our catch up, the pub was getting busy (noisy) so we headed outside to pray… found some seats in a quiet spot… off the street… We're praying and we're interrupted by a homeless guy, who wants to pray with us… we invite him, and he'd like us to pray for him, that he would stay off drugs (he was currently off drugs)… we prayed for him, attempting to get the Gospel in as we did, and he prayed too… He then asks "why did Jesus die for me?"… We explain, attempting to make it as simple as possible… The guy said that he prays each night… We get talking about whether he had somewhere to stay that night… and he didn’t… he needed money to stay in a hostel (I still don’t quite understand how homeless shelters charge for people to stay - maybe they don't - hence this post)… he then asks if we could help him out…

A number of things run through my head…
Has this praying and chat just been for him to get to this question… is that a realistic thing to think? is it me being sinfully judgemental? Maybe bit of both?

What do we do in those situations?

It happens a fair bit, walking past a homeless guy, and they ask for money… sometimes if there's somewhere nearby, I might offer to buy them some food or a drink… but the response is sometimes "I need money so I can stay in a hostel"… how should we balance Christian giving and charity, when we're not totally sure how the money will be used… should we be giving money if it's only going to be used on drugs or something, and not for a hostel? Have I not let the Gospel transform my thinking, or am I right to be suspicious?

Of course, theirs, as much as the top City professional going home to a large house in the country, only has one ultimate need, and that is to come to know Jesus and the forgiveness he offers at the Cross… certainly the priority in our conversation with this man.

As we leave him (my mate giving him some money) we hand him a copy of Mark's Gospel… we've only got an ESV… I think to myself: that's not exactly your easy-going translation (has our desire for accuracy made a less accessible Gospel? Can I even dare ask that????), but maybe coz it's narrative it'll be ok… then I had Acts 8:30-31 ringing in my ears. That then led me on to thinking: he needs to come to church… but I couldn't help thinking: would he feel comfortable, would he understand the sermon when basically it's aimed at graduates… and I just wasn't sure… and that's where I'm left… a bit tied up in my thoughts… (Greg is very much missing his sounding board)

An encouragement from Calvin

"whenever we are troubled at the small number of those who believe, let us counter that by calling to mind that none grasp the mysteries of God save those to whom it is given"