Galatians 1:11-24
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. 13 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. 14 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. 15 But when God, who had set me apart before I was born
and called me through his grace, was pleased 16 to reveal his Son to
me, so that I might proclaim him among the Gentiles, I did not confer with any
human being, 17 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. 18 Then after three years I did go up to
Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days; 19 but I
did not see any other apostle except James the Lord's brother. 20 In
what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie! 21 Then I went
into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, 22 and I was still unknown by
sight to the churches of Judea that are in Christ; 23 they only
heard it said, "The one who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming
the faith he once tried to destroy." 24 And they glorified God
because of me.
Year C
June 5-11
Title: Disciples and a Life Worth Living
June 5, 2016
Introduction
My oldest son told me of a class he
decided to take at IU. It had nothing to do with his major. He had simply heard
it was an awesome class. “History of the Beatles” was the class. When he first
told me, it sounded like a class people would take to get an easy grade. He did
get an A. I recall discussions with him that would begin, “Did you know …” He
would share something going on in the 1960s that was interesting to him in the
area of rock and roll. Sometimes, it would be something I did not know. However,
I liked the Beatles – a lot. Usually, I said something like, “Well, Michael, I did
live it.” It can be rather humbling when your children are studying as history
something through which you lived, but that is another story.
When I attended Asbury Seminary,
one professor in the department on preaching would have classes such as “cinema
and preaching.” You knew it would be some good theology, some good fun, and a
difficult grade. Few people figured out how he graded.
Rutgers has a class on
“Politicizing Beyoncé.” Skidmore College has a course on the Sociology of Miley
Cyrus. You might like a course in the art of walking or the physics of Stark
Trek. Time magazine called them bizarre classes. You can have classes on piercing
and tattooing as well. They might be just fine classes. Everything depends on
the teacher in such classes.
Then there
is the class offered by Yale, and another one offered by Yale Divinity School.
They are called, respectively, "Life Worth Living" and "Christ
and the Good Life." Christians have long pondered such things. Other
religious and philosophical traditions do as well, but such questions have long
been part of our heritage. John Wesley would give a long list of good things a
person might do, but then end with, “Are you happy?”
What makes your life worth living?
Why does “it” make your life worth living? How is your life different because
of this belief?
Application
Grace had turned around the life of
Paul, so much so that he had crucified with Christ his former life. His encounter
with Christ changed his life in a dramatic way. His former life was zealous for
the Law. His former life persecuted the church as a threat to the Law. He
crucified that life with Christ, so that he can live by faith, alive to God,
and enjoy a radically transformed life. He now “gets” what God is doing in the
world. It was not about devotion to a Law that separated the world into Jew and
Gentile, but rather, it was about God bringing people together, reconciling
them to God and to each other.
Thankfully, many of us have not led
lives that required such a dramatic turn around. However, people still need to
see the grace of God shine through you. If you have an encounter with Christ,
Christ will show you the worth and meaning of your life.
First, should we think about our
life's purpose?
Frankly, not everyone does. Some of
us are just not in tune with such philosophical questions. We are happy just to
take life as it comes. Others are so busy with family, work and other
activities that those things supply more meaning than they know what to do
with! In fact, the question of meaning seldom or never arises.
Nevertheless, for some people, I include
myself in this, the matter of what gives life meaning and makes it worth living
is a reoccurring and nagging query. It is not something we can just Google, as
we do with all the other questions we have. These people agree with the popular
sentiment, wrongly attributed to Mark Twain, "The two most important days
in your life are the day you are born, and the day you find out why."
I am not suggesting that we obsess
with this question. If we dwell on it too long, it may make us unable to enjoy the
life we have. However, I am suggesting that such a question is worth pondering
at various stages in our lives.
Second, why are you here?
One psychologist refers to the
mania for meaning that some people possess.
We do not know that such a mania
ever seized Paul. Paul had found a life worth living in hearing and responding
to the call of God.
Consider Dr. Albert Sabin, the
creator of the Sabin polio vaccine. One of the remarkable things about Sabin is
that he never patented his vaccine. Sabin said, "My greatest satisfaction
is to relieve the misery which is part of human life. If each one can do his
part, civilization should be better." Now, what do you think Dr. Sabin
would have said if asked if his life had any meaning?
Your life is worth living.
Third, to believe in Christ is to believe
in the possibility of God calling you.
Paul, in telling his story, in
giving his testimony, is saying, "My life as it has developed after
encountering Christ is a testimony to my character and the believability of the
gospel as I have presented it." Briefly: "Christ gives my life
purpose, worth, meaning, and value."
Annual Conference is the time when
United Methodist bishops ordain those called by God and have the community
confirm that calling through the ordination by the Bishop.
In spite of all that Paul had done
with his life up to his conversion and calling, God called him. If you were an
umpire, you might have said, “Strike Three” several times to Paul. Yet, God did
not call Paul out. God decided to use the apostle Paul to present the risen
Christ to the world.
Think of Christian life as a life
of presenting Christ to the world. In fact, think of your primary vocation and
calling in life as being and becoming a Christian. Within that life of carrying
Jesus to others, we find tremendous freedom. Your vocation may mean telling a
friend where you find Jesus at work, leading a praise song, working in a
community shelter, working with children and youth, a short-term mission trip,
bringing a friend to worship, or welcoming a new family to the congregation. The
list goes on and on, because there are countless ways to carry Jesus to others.
It pleases the Father to reveal the
Son in you, so now you can live free — and present Jesus to others in a wide,
wild and wonderful variety of ways!
As we know, Paul's life after
meeting Christ got a lot harder (if you have any doubt about that, see II
Corinthians 11:24-33), but the meaning he found in serving Christ enabled him
to face those troubles. We need to hear that, too. When life is tough, God has
a meaning for our lives. We need to trust that. Whether we can see the way
ahead or not, it is there.
Conclusion
Remember what Jesus said concerning
anxiety about life:
"But strive first for the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these
things [what you need for life] will be given to you as well" (Matthew
6:33).
Maybe we should seek our place in
God's kingdom. We should go on loving God, following Jesus and loving our
neighbor, and, in so doing, we are living a meaningful life even though we may
not be feeling it.
We can hold
onto that even when we are in deep emotional pain. Every life -- every life --
has meaning, and it lies with God. We should trust God, and go on living each
precious moment God gives us.
Going deeper
Paul must partially defend his calling
and apostleship. However, his primary concern in this passage is defending the
gospel. Christ is the foundation and content of the gospel. This gospel is from
God, and therefore true. This does not seek human approval or even seek to
please people. It seeks faithfulness to the revelation from God. He substantiates
the claim here by pointing to events in his life. It took a revelation from God
to convince him of the truth of salvation by grace and through faith. Of course,
the accounts offered by Luke in Acts 9, 22, and 26 vary, stressing the
involvement of Ananias here. He will recount some incidents that demonstrate
the decisive role the gospel has played in his life. Thus, he will recount his
life in Judaism as a persecutor of the church and zealous for the Law as proof
that only divine intervention could have changed him. The course he had chosen
Judaism was not the course God had chosen. God had another idea for the story
of his life. We call this his conversion or his calling. Like the prophet
Jeremiah, God set him apart from the womb. This one zealous for the Law, which
separated Jews from Gentiles, now becomes an apostle to the Gentiles. His primary
mission in life is to be and become Christian. In his case, this will mean
proclaim Christ among the Gentiles. I suspect this is why the Galatians so
disappointed him. They have deserted the gospel, which had effected such a
change in him. Paul will stress that he went to Damascus for three years. II
Corinthians 11:32-33 tells us that sought to arrest him, but friends helped him
escape. He stayed briefly with Peter and James the brother of the Lord.
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.
Paul’s anxiety is obvious, for he
is “astonished” by the speed at which they were deserting his gospel and opting
for a perverted gospel. Perhaps even more shocking is that they were turning to
an inauthentic gospel and aligning themselves with orators who sought “human
approval” and desired “to please people” (cf. Galatians 1:6-10). Tolmie says
this is phase three of the argument, recounting events from his life in order
to prove the divine origin of his gospel. Betz classifies Galatians 1:12-2:14
as narratio, since, in his opinion,
it corresponds to Cicero's definition of a narratio
in De inv. 1.19, namely a narrative
that functions as an exposition of events, which have occurred or are supposed
to have occurred. Furthermore, Betz indicates that Galatians 1:12-2:14 can be
classified as the first of three types of narratio
distinguished by Cicero, namely one that contains an exposition of a case of
law. Significantly, Betz states explicitly that exordium and narritio are
only preparatory steps leading to the probatio
that begins in Galatians 3:1. If one is to go with Betz here, one will have
to accept the diminished role of 1:6-10 and 1:11-2:14. Yet, I think an open
reading of the letter will not allow us to move down this path with him.
Kennedy argues that Betz is wrong here because the passage does not offer an
account of the facts at issue. He argues that the point is to contribute to
their understanding of the speaker, which would match his view of Galatians as
deliberative rhetoric. The point is that the passage confirms the authority of
Paul, not present the case. If Paul were making a forensic appeal, one would
expect a description of how the missionary opponents came into being and of
their history of troublemaking in Galatia. Tolmie points out that if this were
narration, this section would be merely preparatory for the real argument,
which then diminishes the passage. In addition, it would be strange, if Paul
were as acquainted with ancient rhetoric as much as Betz thinks, that Paul uses
narration only here in his extant
letters. The point Paul is making in
this section is that the gospel is of divine origin. What Paul means is that
here is a decisive eschatological revelation that made Jesus Christ the
foundation and content of his gospel. His rhetorical argument, then, is the
notion of divine authorization. He received his gospel from God, and therefore
it is true. The occurrence of “gospel” seven times in verses 6-12 demonstrates
that it, and not his apostleship, is at issue. People frequently use and abuse such
arguments. He will need to substantiate his claim, which he does by recounting
events from his life. He uses biography as proof. He uses hyperbole in this
approach, exaggerating his activities against the church in order to make his
case. His point is to show that his
calling by God was a dramatic transformation. He stresses revelation. He uses
language consistent with the prophetic tradition. In making such an argument,
he is “legitimizing” his gospel. Jerusalem, in this case, plays a different
role for him than it apparently did for his opponents. For his opponents,
Jerusalem held the basis for their authority. For Paul, Jerusalem represented human origins, but that clearly, a
divine origin takes priority. He emphasizes the long period between his
call and his first visit to Jerusalem. When
he finally went to Jerusalem, his purpose was to acquaint himself with them,
not to receive their sanction. His fifteen-day stay in Jerusalem, while
significant, has its contrast with the three years in Arabia. The positive
reception of his calling and missionary activity says that they acknowledged
what God was doing, and was not authorization for him, which given the
rhetorical setting would be disastrous. If the churches later change their
mind, it does not change the divine origin they recognized at first.
These are the primary points that
Paul considers and examines in 1:11-24. The gospel Paul preaches is from God.
Consequently, after briefly rehearsing his concerns in 1:6-10, he begins to
elaborate on a crucial focus of his letter to the Galatians. He defends himself
and his message. Stated succinctly, Paul develops the themes he introduces in
the letter’s opening.
In verses 11-12, Paul begins with a
claim of divine authorization of his gospel (Tolmie).
11 For I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the
gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin [kata anqrwpon]; 12
for I did not receive it from a human source [para anqrwpou], nor was I
taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.
First, some think that the criticism of
Paul contained in these two verses shape the structure of the letter, but in
reverse order. Thus, in 1:13-2:21, Paul shows that his gospel does not have a
human source, and in 3:1-6:10 it is not of human origin. Paul thus makes it
clear that the gospel is not a philosophy of human origins, but is rooted in “a
revelation of Jesus Christ.” Second, 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 revelation from God to convince him of its truth.[1] Third, 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.[2]
Fourth, 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.
Tolmie says
that in the rest of this segment Paul will now substantiate the claim
just made by recounting events from his life that serve as proof that he received his gospel from God. He will
use biography as proof. These events focus in one way or another on the
decisive role God played in the life of Paul.
In verses 13-14, Tolmie says it seems as if
Paul recounts his former life in Judaism
in such a way that he can convey the notion that someone only divine
intervention could have changed some as fanatic as he was. Two supportive
techniques used by him in this section were also identified, namely reminding
them of something they already know and hyperbole.
13 You have heard, no doubt, of my earlier life in Judaism.
I was violently persecuting the church of God and was trying to destroy [eporqoun] it. [See Acts 9:1-2,
13-14, 26; 22:4-5, 19-20; 26:9-11. Without
revelatory intervention, Paul would not have become a Christian because he was
possessed with such extreme religious fanaticism. In Philippians 3:6, Paul
also says he was a persecutor of the church and a Pharisee seeking
righteousness by the Law.] 14 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. [There is no doubt
about Paul’s fervor. Paul seems to have been an
extreme party member of the Pharisees.
Martin Hengel argued that the term “zeal” had assumed in the Second
Temple Judaism a specific meaning related to the preservation of Jewish
religious and ethnic purity by whatever means necessary, including violence.[3] An Old Testament example
is Phineas in Numbers 25:6-18, a story celebrated in Sirach 45:23-24, I
Maccabees 2:54, and 4 Maccabees 18:12. Paul may be linking himself with such
“zeal” against those whom he considered enemies of the Law. Of course, in the
history of religion, such zeal is not distinctive of any one religion, witness
what has occurred within the Christian tradition, Islam, Hinduism, and even
Buddhism. In this case, the traditions would not include Mosaic laws, but the
oral tradition of the rabbis. Martin
Luther compares the statement of Paul regarding his Jewish tradition to his own
early situation with the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church of his time, which
his life in the cloister called him to depart from Christ. Barth points out that verses 13-14 suggest an answer to what Paul has “crucified,”
what he has given up, in order to follow Christ. He recalls the past in all its
splendor, his life among the Jews, his persecution of the church, his existence
as one known to be zealous for the traditions of the Jewish faith. He was at
home in this world. It was his own. Only Jesus Christ, the One whom he
persecuted, could have uprooted him from it.[4]]
In verses
15-17, Tolmie says Paul recounts his call on the road to Damascus in such a way
that it substantiates his claim in verses 11-12 in two ways: first, the notion
that God called him dominates the account, and secondly, he claims that he did
not consult "flesh and blood" after it happened. Several supportive
rhetorical techniques were identified, namely the fact that he employs words
from the prophetic tradition to describe what happened to him, the use of
hypotactic sentence structure, and antithetic presentation.
15 But when God, who had set me apart [not for his temporal advantage, but was for
him to serve the Gospel. Jeremiah 1:5 also suggests a similar setting
apart. Isaiah 49:1-6 says the servant of the Lord was set apart in the womb.] before I was born and called me through his grace, was
pleased 16 to reveal [apokaluyai]
his Son to me, so that I might proclaim him among the
Gentiles, [First, note that the story of Paul’s life was not his own.
Rather, God was writing his story. Paul had no choice but to obey “the
heavenly vision” (vv. 15a, 16a; cf. Acts 26:19). This vision set him on an
entirely different trajectory. God did not allow him to continue his hostile
pursuit of Christians. Second, we need to look at the nature of the vocation or calling of Paul. Barth says that
verses 15-16 recount what Paul had been until his conversion. He was one set
apart and called by the grace of God from the womb of his mother, like Jeremiah.
What does he become now? He becomes a
Christian, of course, among other things. In particular, it has become his duty
to proclaim Christ among the Gentiles. Therefore, he does not exist except
in his function the life of the church. On this same assumption, he now
addresses his congregation. By this grace, God forgave Paul’s sins against the
church and set him “free from the present evil age” so that he might “proclaim
him [i.e., the Son] among the Gentiles” (vv. 4, 16). In this, both Paul and the
believers in Galatia received the authentic gospel by grace. Given his own transformation by means of
his encounter with God’s gospel, it is no wonder that Paul expressed such utter
shock that they were deserting his gospel (cf. 1:3-4, 6).[5]
Barth stresses that the event of his calling, from which he cannot separate
himself, it pleased God to reveal the Son in him, and to make him a witness of
this living One in whose self-sacrifice people are liberated from their sins
and therefore redeemed.[6]
Later, Barth will stress that the focus
is on what God has revealed, regardless of what one might also say of the human
decision to respond.[7]
Third, we need to consider the
importance of this account of the appearance of the risen Lord to Paul. For
Pannenberg this account becomes pivotal, for not only do the other apostles
accept sufficient agreement between experience and their own in 2:9, but it
also suggests that their experience was closer to that of Paul than the form of
the narration in the Gospel accounts. What is persuasive on this point for him
is that Galatians is a far earlier account (around 50 AD) than are the
narratives of the appearances in the Gospels (around 80-100 AD). Thus, the
appearances were “from heaven.”[8]
He stresses that the apostolic proclamation does not have a constitutive function
for the “Christ event.” The Easter message follows the Easter event, it does
not constitute it. In fact, the event constitutes the message.[9]
Fourth, to return to the theme of this passage, as Tolmie puts it, in the case
of Galatians 1:1-5, he claimed divine authorization for his apostleship,
but in Galatians 1:11-12 he links divine authorization primarily to his gospel.
I did not confer with any
human being, [prosaneqemhn sarki
kai aimati ] [See Acts 9:23, 26; 22:17; 26:20] 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were already
apostles before me, [Paul did not even draw the gospel from other apostles. He could
not, because to do so would potentially undermine the legitimacy of the
revelation he had received. Moreover, if he had conferred with human
authorities, he would be guilty of “seeking human approval” and attempting “to
please people,” a charge that he had previously laid against those who were
perverting the gospel (v. 10).
but I went away at once
into Arabia, and afterwards I returned to Damascus. [Instead, Paul went
to Arabia and Damascus, a point he expands upon in II Corinthians.
II Corinthians 11:32-33
In Damascus, the governor under King Aretas guarded the
city of Damascus in order to seize me, but I was let down in a basket through a
window in the wall, and escaped from his hands.
In verses
18-20, Tolmie says Paul recounts his first visit to Jerusalem in such a way
that it cannot weaken the notion of the divine origin of his gospel in any way. He emphasizes the long
period between his call and the visit; he describes the purpose of his visit as
merely to be acquainted; he mentions the relatively short duration of the
visit; he denies meeting any other bearer of the tradition except James, and he
emphasizes the trustworthiness of his account by means of an oath.
18 Then after three years [The mention of
three years in Damascus would be since his conversion. To F. F. Bruce, this
would be similar to the wilderness period of Moses, although it appears that
here is where Paul went to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. John Chrysostom
thought so as well, as Paul is a man of fervent spirit, ready to preach to
barbarians. He notes that Paul does not boast of his success.] I did go up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with
him fifteen days; 19 but I did not see any other apostle except
James the Lord's brother. [It at least appears the reason was acquaintance,
a relatively innocent meeting. Chrysostom thinks this to be the case, and many
modern commentators agree. Since people widely knew of the former reputation of
Paul as a zealous Pharisee, it is likely that his travels as a Christian
missionary were known as well. Consequently, he felt compelled to mention his
subsequent journeys to Jerusalem lest anyone mistakenly conclude that he had
later sought human approval. At the same time, we might suggest that had there
been a significant perception among the other apostles that the experience of
Paul was substantially different, they might have objected. Paul often shows his fidelity to the church
in Jerusalem. He maintained the bonds of fellowship with that church, even with
its more Jewish flavor.] 20 In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie! [Paul’s testimony
is so passionate, he even takes an oath.]
In verses
21-24, Tolmie Paul recounts his missionary work
in such a way that he conveys two notions to the audience, namely that he had
no contact with Jerusalem during this time, and that the churches in Judea
reacted by acknowledging that God was behind his work. The churches in
Israel would not know Paul because his fifteen days there were private. Tolmie
also highlights Paul's skillful choice of certain words (diwvkwn, ejpovrqei and pivsti).
21 Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, 22
and I was still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea that are in Christ; [Finally, and in
order to further confirm his self-defense — that is, that he had never sought
human approval nor to please men — Paul refers to his travels into Syria and
Cilicia.] 23 they only heard it said,
"The one who formerly was persecuting us [o diwkwn hmaV pote] is now
proclaiming the faith [Scholars will note how early Christians made
synonymous “the faith” and “the gospel.”] he once tried to destroy [eporqei]." 24 And they glorified God
because of me. [Why? For only by the grace of God, a gospel divine in origin, could such
a transformation come to a violent persecutor of God’s church. We also must not
miss the point that Paul was actively preaching the gospel without human
authorization.]
In order to complete the biography or
testimony of Paul at this point, we would need to read the first part of
Chapter 2. He tells us that 14 years later he went back to Jerusalem. This would
be around 50 AD. The result is that the
apostles offer him the right hand of Christian fellowship, accepting him as an
equal in apostolic ministry. They acknowledge that their primary ministry
remains among the Jews, while the primary ministry of Paul is among the
Gentiles. Paul will always have deep affection for the church in Jerusalem. Paul
has told us that God chose him by grace. In this visit, Paul says the other
apostles saw the grace God had given him.
No comments:
Post a Comment