1 Paul an apostle—sent neither by human commission nor from
human authorities, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him
from the dead— 2 and all the members of God's family who are with me, To the
churches of Galatia: 3 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord
Jesus Christ, 4 who gave himself for our sins to set us free from the present
evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, 5 to whom be the glory
forever and ever. Amen.
6 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— 7 not that there is another gospel, but
there are some who are confusing you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 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! 9 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! 10 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.
11 For I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the
gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin; 12 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.
Year C
May 29-June 4
May 29, 2016
Cross~Wind
Title: Disciples and the Gospel
Introduction
Paul refers
to “a different gospel.” Today, we might take this to mean someone has
discovered a new “gospel.” Archeologists have discovered around 20 such gospels
that claim to be the words and deeds of Jesus: the Gospel of Judas, Thomas, and
Mary Magdalene.[1]
We use the term “gospel” in another
way. To say something is “gospel” is to declare it true and authentic. If people
teach “a different gospel,” they teach something as true in contrast to
something else that has claimed truth. In Galatia, some teachers have entered
the community teaching something quite different from that which Paul taught
them.
One of the African delegates to
General Conference (2016) struck me. Methodist missionaries brought the gospel
to Africa long ago, I am assuming at the end of the 1800s. Methodism
experienced growth over the decades, but has lately exploded in its growth. It will
not surprise me if the number of Methodists in Africa will exceed the number in
America relatively soon. In any case, the delegate expressed appreciation for
bringing the gospel to Africans. Yet, he said that when he comes to General
Conference, it feels like “another gospel” has taken over in the American
branch of Methodism. That saddened me. I hope it saddens you as well.
If you were to develop a list of the
different gospels for our time, what would be on the list?
Would the Gospel of Prosperity or
Health and Wealth make the list? Jesus cautioned us about the dangers of
wealth.
The Social Gospel might make the
list. It arose out of an evangelical spirit that wanted to align this world
closer to the will of God, it also relied on a notion of human progress that
was unrealistic and focused on what human beings can do.
The Gospel of Positive or
Possibility Thinking might make the list. While full of helpful advice, it
seems to have little room for the cross.
The Apocalyptic Gospel might make
the list in that it encourages people to watch in the sky for the returning
Christ while leading people to disregard this world.[2]
The Fundamentalist Gospel would make
the list. It seeks to freeze some moment of Christianity in the past as somehow
the standard for all ages. The problem here is that churches always need
openness to the fresh winds of the Spirit.
The Progressive Gospel might make
the list. It would seek to move the churches past Christ and into some new age
of nirvana of “progressive” ethics and politics, making it clear that the Bible
and Jesus have become irrelevant to perceived political needs and ideologies of
our time.
You can probably think of other
"gospels."
The gospel I find myself
confronting today is one that makes the primary agenda of the church reflect a
particular part of the culture. If the culture is getting divided and angry,
then the church must follow its lead. Yet, in the process, we forget that the
true gospel brings reconciliation. If the culture is going to fully explore and
extend the sexual revolution, the church must affirm it all. I have talked with
people whose lives became so difficult and painful because they abandoned the
guidance of the church in this matter. As far as I can tell, the primary
mission of the church is to be the Body of Christ in this world. The church is
to represent Christ. The church is to be the people of God. It will always
conduct its life in tension with the culture.
Why do we come up with new gospels?
Maybe we keep coming up with new
gospels because we resist or rebel against authority rather than respect
authority. For many of us, authority has an ambiguous place in our lives. We know
we need authorities. Yet, we also can romanticize rebellion against it. If we
hear of some new gospel that does not sound like the one we heard from our
pastors and other teachers, something inside thinks, “Well, maybe …” It can all
sound good. The gospel may need updating, after all.
Maybe we keep coming up with new
gospels because it offends our sense of knowledge. After all, we are modern
people. If we are really with it, we are post-modern. We are the cognoscenti. [I
just saw this word for the first time this week, and wondered if I could work
it into a sentence. Now, I have even worked it into a sermon.] We are people
with special knowledge. The gospel does not always please me![3] Sometimes, I wish it said something else. Yet,
for me as a preacher in particular, I feel a special weight, when I stand before
you, to preach the gospel, even and especially in places where I wish it said
something different. Such resistance in me may be a sign that I need to grow in
this area of my life.
We may well need to have less
concern about what other people think.[4]
When we turn from the thoughts, ideologies, and agendas that appeal to us and
toward identifying ourselves with Christ, it sounds like being a disciple of
Christ in a way that transforms this world.[5]
Application
A close look at this passage, then,
reveals the gospel that Paul preached, and the one around which the Galatians
(and we) should center our faith and lives. Let me briefly outline this gospel.
1. The gospel is not a human construction, subject to
alteration by every human generation.
The gospel comes from God, who has
taken the initiative to rescue us from sin and death through divine grace (1:1,
3-4, 6).[6]
Granted, the
Quran says that it derives from God. The Book of Mormon says it derives from
God. We can trust this gospel because it lifts up Jesus Christ.
2. The grace of God is embodied and enacted in Jesus' death.
The death of Jesus liberates us
from sin and the power of the present age. We cannot defeat sin and evil and
change the world on our own. We need a Savior who defeats sin and its ultimate
power, death. Jesus does this through the cross and his resurrection (1:3-4).[7]
You see, we need saving, reconciling,
redeeming, healing, and liberation from the forces of darkness. We need
guidance. We face real enemies in our lives. We keep growing in our
appreciation and understanding of this gospel. We keep growing in our
application of this gospel to our lives. Is this not what being a disciple of
Jesus Christ means?
3. The grace of God enacted through the Lord Jesus enables
us to become children of God, bringing people from different backgrounds,
cultures and customs together into a new community not marked by ethnicity and
circumcision, but by faith and baptism (1:3).[8]
As part of
this family, we acknowledge that our lives will reflect a different set of
beliefs and values from that of the surrounding culture.
4. We participate with God in his mission of transforming the world into God's new
creation.
As Paul puts it in 6:15,
"Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is anything; but a new creation is
everything!"
The redemption promised at the end
begins here, in your life and mine. It begins among the people of God. This happens
through the gift of the Holy Spirit. The good news is that God's kingdom is
near and that will be the means of changing the world, not taking us away from
it. The gospel is a call to engage the world. As Revelation puts it, God is not
about to destroy the world and make all new things; instead, God comes to
redeem the world and "make all things new" (Revelation 21:5).
Conclusion
Maybe we keep coming up with new
gospels because the one Jesus gave us actually requires something of us. It may
require us to say No to our culture. Of course, we will want to say it lovingly
and respectfully.[9] We will want to be firm in
our No. We will want to be loving in our No.
When I did a run/walk for 4.7 miles
for about an hour on Friday, a song came up on the Internet radio program I usually
have on, “Against the Wind” by Bob Seger. The phrase that struck me was at the
end:
Against the wind
I'm still runnin' against the wind
I'm older now but still running
Against the wind
I thought of the name of this
church. “Cross~Wind.” A cross wind blows against the direction one is
traveling. The cultural wind will blow us in one direction. The gospel will
always challenge that direction. We need to live in that tension.
The faith we may have learned from
faithful parents, friends, pastors, and teachers should keep driving us to the
Bible and to Jesus. We move away from our opinions and accept the witness of
the New Testament. Such faith must get in here (point to the heart), even as it
comes from the witness of others.
When you take that step of faith, a
completely new world opens before you. This new world is a beautiful one. You start
seeing the world differently, as a world that God loves and therefore you love.
You step into a world in which you learn what it means to love God with all
that you are. You love your neighbor.
I hope you have taken that step of
faith. If not, please know that after this service, you can talk with me or
another in this church.
Going deeper
Galatians is one of the primary
letters of Paul. If you want to explore the teachings of Paul, this letter,
along with Romans and the letters to the Corinthians, are the primary letters
you will want to study. Paul wrote these letters in the 50s AD. He explains his
basic gospel concerning Jesus Christ. He guides the largely Gentile churches
morally and spiritually. He helps them form their communities of faith.
This letter opens in a unique way. He
offers an extended greeting that includes the main points of the Gospel he
preaches. However, Paul usually has a prayer of thanksgiving. Instead, Paul
jumps right into the concern he has for them. He expresses disgust with them
immediately that they have departed so quickly from the gospel. They have
departed within a ten-year period, maybe as little five years. These opponents
of Paul sounded good, for they directed people to the Old Testament and the
importance of Jewish Law and circumcision. We can be thankful that Paul took up
the challenge in this letter. Yet, the depth of his anger toward them is a
little surprising. He must have known, though, that if he expressed his anger
strongly, it would make them stop and think about what they are doing as a
community. You see, I can think of some people who would be angry with me, and
it would not matter. I might even where it as a badge of honor. However, I can
think of some people who, if they expressed anger or frustration with how lived
my life, it would cause me to engage in some serious prayer and meditation. It would
matter greatly that I had done certain things that caused them to speak to me
this way.
Paul believed they still respected
him. Yet, he also feels the need in the opening two chapters to remind them of
whom he is. It would matter to them that they had disappointed him. He will
appeal to the teaching about Jesus that he knows will find agreement among
them. They will agree that God raised Jesus from the dead. They will agree that
Jesus died for their sin and therefore liberated them from the evil that
dominates the world. They have the privilege of living in this liberty through
the Spirit who lives in them.
One of the primary obligations of
preachers and teachers in the church is to protect the gospel. A false gospel
will not have the power and significance to change the lives of people. They are
in danger of “deserting” the gospel, as a soldier might “desert” his post.
Before I read the text, and before
we start thinking that Galatians must have been awful group, I find the
reminder from Martin Luther helpful. Something in us rebels against the gospel.
Even those who have good footing live in slippery places in matters of faith. He
encourages to learn carefully the gospel and to abide by it. Let believers
continue in humble prayer, for they are molested not by puny foes, but by
mighty ones.
The theme of Galatians 1:1-5 is that of salutation or greeting,
emphasizing the divine commission of Paul. It is longer than other letters,
already suggesting the themes of the letter, that of the divine source of his
apostleship and that Christ is the source of salvation, apart from the Law.
This opening is shorter and less friendly than any other letter. He
offers no words of praise or thanksgiving. He brings together the two themes of
the letter. He is a true apostle, which will cover in Chapters 1-2. He will
then present the good news of freedom for those who believe in Chapters 3-5. As
Tolmie (p. 31) points out, Paul is
adapting the salutation portion of this letter to his primary purpose of
persuading the Galatians to his point of view. He points out that
immediately, Paul makes use of Christian
tradition as an element of persuasion. Tradition is not just a rhetorical
strategy, but is also an appeal to an ethos. The purpose is to bind his readers
to him, rather than a matter of polemics. Such tradition is shared knowledge.
Tradition is an example of knowledge shared by both speaker and audience, and
one may use it in a highly effective manner, since the audience will not
dispute its truth. In fact, the speaker can accept that the audience will
believe it to be true. The speaker may use such shared knowledge as a common
ground for supporting the view the speaker advocates. The theme of his
reference to tradition is on the inauguration of the eschatological age by the
resurrection of Christ. It suggests an interpretation of the voluntary death of
Christ as something that happened according to the will of God in order to
effect this liberation. The notion of spiritual liberty, which becomes so
important later, finds a basis in tradition here. The crucial issue is one of
divine authorization, and so, he begins by showing them how they are united in
these matters. Thus, rather than dealing with the contents of the gospel, he
deals with divine authorization. It would be futile to convince these people of
his gospel if they did not believe he had been authorized by God to preach and
teach it.
Galatians 1:1-12
1 Paul an apostle—sent
neither by human commission nor from human authorities, but through Jesus
Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead— Lightfoot notes
that God is the fountain-head of his apostleship, distinguishing him from false
prophets. Yet, as Calvin points out,
false prophets will make the same claim as does Paul. He will also suggest that
all true ministers of the gospel will have God as the source of their ministry,
rather than people. Thus, Paul stresses the directness of the divine
commission. We might note however, that
in Acts 14 and in other places, it is clear that laying on of hands and
commissioning from the people and the elders is an important step in ministry.
Thus, there is nothing inherently wrong with human commissioning. As we shall
discover, Paul stresses the directness
of his divine commission due to the context of his struggle in these churches.
The point is not setting aside the commissioning in Antioch, but rather, to
stress that it had a higher authority. In reality, of course, Paul will
identify his conversion and apostleship with the same experience. F. F. Bruce
points out that one can assume that his opponents had a quite different account
of his apostleship. The mention of the resurrection here has special force
because Paul received his commission from the risen Lord.
Betz explores the account of Paul’s apostleship offered by the
opponents. For him, they must have been badgering Paul about his apostleship.
If his office was human, then it was inferior to their apostleship, and they
could control him. If his office was divine, then his vision was inferior to
their apostleship, because they had personal contact with Jesus. He points
out that we know little about apostleship because the New Testament sources
reflect an advanced stage of development (see 1:17-19; 2:8; Romans 11:13; 1
Cor. 15:8). Apostleship began sometime from AD 30-50 and it is part of the
Galatian controversy. Jesus’ disciples became apostles, making the concept
rooted in Judaism. For Betz, the fact
that Paul considered himself an apostle shows that religious experience also
created apostles, making his concept rooted in Gnosticism. The “however” I
would offer is that what Paul experienced was the risen Lord. It appears that
as Paul relates the story later in Chapter 1, the apostles in Jerusalem, after
hearing Paul discuss his account of the risen Lord, considered it similar to
their own. Personally, I would be cautious about trying to place too close to
Gnostic teaching.
For Barth we need to ponder the
question, who is Paul, that he dares to
represent himself as the preacher of the only gospel? In this verse, the
contrast becomes apparent, for Paul is an apostle, the human being who speaks
this human word, not from a human being, but “through Jesus Christ and God the
Father, who raised him from the dead.” Commissioning by a human being would
mean that Paul would have preached another gospel.[10]
Martin Luther captures the polemical nature of this letter by immediately
commenting on this verse that the world
bears the Gospel a grudge because the Gospel condemns the religious wisdom of
the world. The world will want to develop its religious views, while it will
also charge the gospel with being subversive, licentious, and offensive to God.
It receives persecution from the world as if it were a plague. Yet, the paradox
is that the gospel supplies the world with the salvation of Jesus Christ, peace
of conscience, and every blessing.
As an
aside, Luther draws from this passage
that all ministers should make much of their calling and impress upon others
the fact that they have been delegated by God to preach the Gospel. As
ambassadors of a government are honored for their office and not for their
private person, so ministers of Christ should exalt their office in order to
gain authority among men. This is not pride, he thinks, but needful respect for
the office of pastor. In a sense, Paul takes pride in his ministry, not to his
own praise but to the praise of God. Further, John Chrysostom stresses that
always to address one’s disciples with mildness, even when they need severity
is not the part of a teacher. Rather, one who did this would be one who is an
enemy of the church. He points out that Paul would not be so indignant about a
small matter, for Paul was not like this. Here is a sign that the matters with
which he is dealing in this letter are serious.
The larger point here is that is
that it is futile trying to convince them of "his gospel" if they are
not convinced that God has authorized the “he” of his gospel.
2
and all the members of God's family who are with me, To the churches of Galatia:
Lightfoot notes that the phrase may suggest Paul was not at any of the
great centers, like Macedonia or Corinth, but possibly between Macedonia and
Achaia. It suggests the small band of
those who were with him. The abruptness
of the language is remarkable. Barth says that the seriousness of the
confrontation is clear is that Paul does not address them as church of God or
Christ.[11] That is true, but I am not
so sure one can make too much of this, for he does refer to them as “brothers
and sisters” and as the “churches” of Galatia. In fact, Calvin struggled with
the fact that Paul uses such generous language with a church that “had almost
entirely revolted from Christ.” The struggle of Calvin arises out of his own
battle with the churches of Europe. To his mind, the Pope wants to impose
almost anything upon Christian people. He then speculates that if Paul were
alive in the time of Calvin, “he would perceive the miserable and dreadfully
shattered remains of a church; but he would perceive no building.” Calvin
offers the suggestion that Paul is using church as a metaphor, taking the small
part of these churches that is faithful, and makes it stand for the whole.
3 Grace to you and
peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, Paul wishes for the churches
a state of friendship with God, as Calvin notes. The language of Paul stresses
the exalted place that the resurrected Christ had in the thinking of Paul.
4 who gave himself for
our sins to set us free from the present evil age, according to the will of our
God and Father, Betz stresses that “gave himself for our sins” is probably
the oldest recorded Christology. Further,
“to set us free from the present evil age” is a rescue-oriented interpretation
of the Christology. When Paul says, “according to the will of our God and
Father” he underscores that salvation through Christ was in complete harmony
with the will of God. The present world or age, as opposed to coming age of the
Messiah. The present coincides with
the rule of Satan, and with the rule of sin and Law. Lightfoot reminds us that for Paul, the
present one is passing away, while the eternal one is about to come. Christ has
freed us from these forces and made us members of God's kingdom. As Lightfoot
puts it, the Gospel is a rescue from bondage. Lightfoot notes that here is the
ground of acceptance with God. The use
of peri does not mean a vicarious act, but it will frequently appear in
that context. As Barth asks who Jesus Christ is, Paul answers that Christ is
the one who delivers us. Paul is committed to the one who has brought
liberation and redemption.[12] Calvin observes that had
the churches of Galatia appreciated these “benefit of redemption, they would
never have fallen into opposite views of religion.” He thinks that one “who
knows Christ in a proper manner beholds him earnestly, embraces him with the
warmest affection, is absorbed in the contemplation of him, and desires no
other object. The best remedy for purifying our minds from any kind of errors
or superstitions, is to keep in remembrance our relation to Christ, and the
benefits which he has conferred upon us.” F. F. Bruce views this as a version
of realized eschatology. The age to come still lies in the future, of course,
but believers in Christ here and now partake of it. Christ, through the
resurrection, as already entered the age to come, but believers now share his
life. As Paul will argue, the Holy Spirit helps believers now enjoy that life.
This passage may be the earliest written statement we now have concerning the
significance of the death of Christ. It relates his death to the supersession
of the old age by the new. Here is an example of Christ offering himself, which
is in the theology of Paul, is also a matter of God being in Christ and the
cross.
5 to whom be the glory
forever and ever. Amen. Betz wonders why Paul offers a doxology here.
Calvin notes that Paul intends to stimulate thanksgiving and contemplation of
the invaluable gift they had received from Christ.
The theme of Galatians 1:6-10 is that Paul is astonished that these
people so quickly turn from the gospel to something that is no gospel at all.
He invokes a curse upon anyone bringing a counterfeit gospel. Aristotle makes it clear that the orator
will have to speak to bring the hearers into a frame of mind that will dispose
them to anger, and to represent the adversaries as open to such charges and
possessed of such qualities as do make people angry. [13] In this case, I think, Paul
wants his readers to be as angry with his opponents as he is. He also wants
them to be angry with themselves for allowing this situation to occur. Think of
it this way. I can think of people who would be disgusted with something I say
or do, and not only would it not matter, I would wear it as a badge of honor. I
can also think of other people whom, if I did or said something that actually
disgusted them, it would make me quite angry with myself. Paul assumes that
these people will care that they have done something that has disgusted him.
The reprimand found in 1:6-10 is uncharacteristic of most of Paul’s other
letters, since he offers no thanksgiving for the Galatians in his salutation.
Nonetheless, one might expect his
scolding in light of the letter’s initial greeting where he declares that the
gospel is centered on a number of core confessions. Specifically, he was
“sent neither by human commission [ap anqrwpwn]
nor from human authorities” (di anqrwpou),
the gospel is a message about “grace and peace,” and is rooted in the sacrifice
of “the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins to set us free from
the present evil age” (cf. Galatians 1:1-4).
In comparison with other letters of
Paul, this warning takes the place of the normal thanksgiving that Paul offers.
At least of the letters of Paul that we have in the New Testament, this is the
only time Paul omits a thanksgiving. F. F. Bruce thinks this is because of the
urgency to get to the point. P. T. O’Brien says it was because there was
nothing for which to thank them, given the polemical tone.[14]
However, this may be going too far. For Tolmie (p. 37), this section, as a rhetorical strategy, expresses disgust with the
situation in Galatia in a way that has the purpose of getting them to
reconsider their position. He conveys his emotional dissatisfaction with the
way things have gone in Galatia. If one approaches the letter from the
perspective ancient rhetorical matters, here begins the exordium. Tolmie
rejects this approach. Paul uses rebuke
as expressed in his perplexity in verse 6, vilification in verse 6c-7, a
twofold curse in verses 8-9, and refutation of criticism in verse 10. All
of this is instead of a thanksgiving at the beginning. Paul finds it shocking that they have become traitors so soon. Verse 10
suggests that the accusation against him that he is trying to change the gospel
to make it easier for the Galatians to become Christians. The purpose of Paul
here is to get the Galatian Christians to reconsider their position or at least
the direction they are heading. I would suggest that if this is the case, Paul
must assume that his readers would not want to make him disgusted.
Barth says the task committed to the community is to
protect the Gospel from falsification in the form of its transformation into
“another gospel.” It becomes a pseudo-Gospel not in accord to the direction of
the Lord Jesus Christ, not under the impulsion of the Holy Spirit, but is novel
in its adoption and conception. The community arbitrarily and independently
interprets it, allowing varying moods, modes of thought, instincts, ideas, and
needs of a specific age to determine the gospel. It robs the Gospel of its original
power and significance.[15]
6 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— Betz says that “I am astonished” is
indignant law court style reaction. Galatian
churches are in the process of shifting allegiance from Paul to his opponents.
“Deserting” is for him political language. Yet, it could also be military
language, as soldiers deserting their post. “The one who called you” sounds
like Paul is talking about himself, but his use of this phrase elsewhere
suggests that God be regarded as the agent of calling. “In the grace of Christ”
suggests that they are already saved, so why are they seeking another way? “A
different gospel” means away from grace in Paul’s judgment. Lightfoot opines
that “soon” refers to since their conversion in 51 AD. As Calvin notes, one cannot imagine a proper season to revolt from
Christ, but his surprise is just. His surprise is that they have left their
freedom so quickly. The source of their conversion is God and the means is
grace rather than works. There is an
implied antithesis between grace and works.
7 not that there is
another gospel, but there are some who are confusing you and want to pervert
the gospel of Christ. Paul makes the
point that all the apostles preach only one gospel. Betz says that “another
gospel” means Paul corrects himself because there is no other gospel. “Pervert
the gospel” is Paul’s opinion. Paul
claims to represent Christian orthodoxy. F. F. Bruce notes that Paul addresses
his converts in the second person (you) but to his opponents in the third
person (them). He will make it clear in 5:5 that their insistence upon
circumcision is a significant diversion from the doctrine he preached. He knew
the joy of release from legal bondage. He did want them to take up that bondage
again.
8 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! “Anathema” is the
term used here, which refers to a curse upon them, and, according to Lightfoot,
not directly to excommunication. However, Betz think of this as the first
instance of excommunication. I think Calvin gets it right when he says that for
Paul, such a person should not even receive a hearing. Lightfoot also notes
that when he refers to “we,” the reference would be to his companions when he
preached there, Silas and Timothy. Paul is asserting the oneness and integrity
of the gospel.
9 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! Paul stresses that they have
received the gospel, an affirmation that Calvin points to as saying that they
must not regard the gospel as something unknown, existing in the air, or in their
own imaginations. Thus, the gospel they “received” is the true gospel of
Christ. For him, that “gospel” is sufficiently clear in the writings of Paul.
10 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. One way to read
this set of questions is that a Jewish faction accuses Paul of trying to please
people, namely, Gentiles, by making it easier for them by not insisting upon
the male members of the community to receive circumcision. When he refers to
“still pleasing people,” he likely has in mind his efforts before his
conversion, rather than a time when he did preach that circumcision was
necessary. F. F. Bruce points out that persuading people is the business Paul
is in, but pleasing people is not.
1:11-2:21 Paul Offers a Narrative Defense of His Gospel and
Apostleship: An Autobiographical Sketch
Paul emphasizes that he received the gospel
by revelation at his conversion. He reviews his life in Judaism. He stresses
the divine source of his gospel, something the leaders of Jerusalem
acknowledged. Paul has a concern that his opponents deny the independent status
of his apostleship.
Aristotle stresses that some introductions are “remedial,” concerned
with the speaker, the hearer, the subject, or the opponent of the speaker. The
purpose of such an introduction is to direct or remove prejudice. The
appeal to hearers aims at securing their goodwill, or at arousing their
resentment, or sometimes at gaining their serious attention to the case. Such an introduction may also seek to
convince the audience of your good character, or that the course of action is
in their interest. Such a remedial introduction is an attempt to gain an
appropriate hearing.[16]
He goes on to say that deliberative rhetoric will not usually be needed, for
the facts do not need introduction. However, one may have to give an account of oneself or of one’s opponents. One
may have to excite or dispel some prejudice, or make the matter under discussion
seem more or less important than before.[17]
In this case, of course, Paul is wanting to heighten the importance of the
matter that he sees needs discussion. Further, he says one can dispel
objectionable suppositions about oneself, which is clearly what Paul feels the
need to do in this section.[18]
Aristotle also writes of narration,
which usually involves the character of the speaker and stirring the emotions
of the listeners.[19]
If one pays attention to this section, Paul
clearly tries to engage his readers emotionally, along with defending his
character. Aristotle also says that in deliberative rhetoric, narration is
useful only to recall past events that will help listeners make better plans
for the future. In this case, if his readers regain confidence that Paul is an
apostle sent from God, it will strengthen the case he makes for the gospel that
he preaches.
The theme of Galatians 1:11-24 describes the authentic gospel that Paul
proclaimed, which stands in contrast to “a different gospel” [eteron
euaggelion]” to which the churches in Galatia were “turning.” In the
context of 1:11-2:21, it constitutes his first defense of his apostleship and
gospel, referring to the divine source of the gospel and the confirmation he
received from the leaders of the church in Jerusalem.
11 For I want you to
know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of
human origin; 12 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. Pannenberg says
that this use of revelation clearly
refers to experiences of revelation, in contrast to the apocalyptic notion of
revelation he find in verse 16. He becomes aware of the centrality of salvation
by grace and through faith, although he will spend time in the church
reflecting upon the theological implication of this truth. It took a revolution
from God to convince him of its truth.[20] One can compare this account with what Luke
says in Acts 9, 22, and 26, where Luke shows the intertwining of divine and
human (Ananias) agency in the conversion of Paul. Barth stresses that Paul has
received instruction from this revelation alone.[21]
Martin Luther notes how easily one can depart from the teaching of
justification by faith. He knows how quickly a person can forfeit the joy of
the Gospel. He knows in what slippery places even those who seem to have a good
footing in the matters of faith. In the midst of the conflict, when we should
be consoling ourselves with the Gospel, the Law rears up and begins to rage all
over our conscience. For him, the Gospel is frail because we are frail. What
makes matters worse, he says, is that one-half of ourselves, our own reason,
stands against us. Thus, we have something within us that wants to depart from
the notion of justification by faith. He then urges that every believer
carefully learn the Gospel. Let believers continue in humble prayer, for they
are molested not by puny foes, but by mighty ones, foes who never grow tired of
warring against us. These, our enemies, are many: Our own flesh, the world, the
Law, sin, death, the wrath and judgment of God, and the devil himself. He goes
on to refer to a conversation he had with Doctor Staupitz when he first began
preaching justification by faith. “I like it well, that the doctrine which you
proclaim gives glory to God alone and none to man. For never can too much
glory, goodness, and mercy be ascribed unto God.” For Luther, such words
comforted and confirmed him. The Gospel is true because it deprives human
beings of all glory, wisdom, and righteousness and turns over all honor to the
Creator alone. For Luther, it is safer to attribute too much glory to God than
unto humanity. The problem with such sentiments, however, is that it runs the
risk of denigrating the world God has made, and in particular, the creatures
made in the image of God. Further, we also learn from John 3:16 that God loves
this world. Of course, we need to offer due honor to God, but we do not honor
God by not also honoring the world God has made.
[1] In 2012, a newly discovered Coptic text has Jesus
referring to his wife. Scholars already have documentation of a sect of
Christianity that refers to the wife of Jesus that date back to the 100’s AD. Even
in the early centuries of the church, “a different gospel” was already gaining
steam. Of course, the Holy Spirit led the writers of our New Testament and the
early church to say that the four gospels we have accurately reflect the
Christ.
[2] Dallas Willard coined the phrase “The Gospel of Sin
Management” to describe a gospel whose concern is to get people into heaven and
has little concern for life here and now, making salvation irrelevant to life
now.
[3] Does the
gospel always please you? If it does, let me gently suggest that we may have
turned the gospel into a reflection of our thoughts.
[4] We lay
aside what we want, and focus our thoughts and behavior on Christ. We lay aside
pleasing the groups with which we tend to identify. We stand with Christ, which
means that our devotion to a particular ideology, which in our time is likely
devotion to a political ideology, is something we need to have the courage to
set aside.
[5] If a gospel only benefits the individual, you can bet
it is the wrong gospel. A false gospel always seeks human approval and mostly
benefits the human who preaches or believes it. Paul reminds the Galatians that
the real gospel -- the gospel of what God has done and is doing through Christ
-- does indeed benefit us by saving us from sin and death, but it does not stop
there. The real gospel is the good news that God is transforming us so that we
can be part of God's transformation of the whole cosmos. To put it another way,
the gospel is not about our leaving, but about God's coming! We have been saved
by faith, but for God's purpose. The gospel is not about pleasing others or
even ourselves; it is all about pleasing God and, like Paul, becoming Christ's
servants (1:10).
[6] Paul refers to the divine origin of his apostleship. He
even says that if an angel or even someone from his missionary team were to
preach a message different from the one they received just a few years ago, it
is not gospel.
[7] We can
trust this gospel because Christ gave his life for us and for our sins. It lifts
up Jesus, whom God the Father, the God of Israel, the God of Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob, the God of David and the prophets, raised him from the dead. This will
always be a step of faith for us. We accept the witness of the New Testament
concerning what God has done in Jesus.
[8] Paul refers
to the members of the family of God who are with him. He extends grace and peace
to the Galatians. We become part of the people of God by new birth, symbolized
in our baptism and in our participation in the Lord’s Supper.
[9] We will
not want to become the beastly angry and divisive people that seem to drive
public discourse today. We will not want to participate with the world in the
sexual revolution that is even now wrecking the lives of people
[10] (Church Dogmatics, IV.1 [61.4], 637).
[11] (Church Dogmatics, IV.1 [61.4] 638).
[12] (Church Dogmatics, IV.1 [61.4] 637).
[13] Rhetoric, 1380a.
[14] (Introductory Thanksgivings, 1977).
[15] (Church Dogmatics, IV.3 [72.3], 818).
[16] Rhetoric, 1415a.
[17] Ibid.,
1415b.
[18] Ibid.,
1416a.
[19] Ibid.,
1416b and 1417b.
[20] (Systematic Theology, Vol I, 209).
[21] (Church Dogmatics, IV.1 [61.4], 637).
No comments:
Post a Comment