|
Did Paul Break His Word? By Richard Jordan
Galatians 2:9 records Paul’s own
account of the agreement reached at the great conference in Jerusalem in
this manner:
“And when James, Cephas, and John,
who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me,
they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; THAT WE
SHOULD GO UNTO THE HEATHEN, AND THEY UNTO THE CIRCUMCISION.”
While this seems clear and
straightforward, Paul’s subsequent actions as recorded in the book of
Acts have raised questions as to his sincerity and honesty in this
regard. Take Acts 17:1-3 as an example:
“Now when they had passed through
Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, WHERE WAS A
SYNAGOGUE OF THE JEWS:
“AND PAUL, AS HIS MANNER WAS, WENT
IN UNTO THEM, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the
scriptures, “Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered,
and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto
you, is Christ.”
Clearly there is a problem: If Paul
entered into an agreement that the Jerusalem apostles should go “unto
the circumcision” and he “unto the heathen,” how could he so
regularly go to the Jews in synagogues that Luke declares it to be
“as his manner was”—implying it was a well-known and consistent
procedure for him to do so?
If he agreed to go only “unto the
heathen,” how could he honestly go so habitually to the Jews?
Did he simply break his word? Was he really so willing to be “all things
to all men” that he would thus violate his solemnly given oath?
Surely we can dismiss dishonesty on
Paul’s part as the answer. But what then? We feel that a more accurate
understanding of the terms “circumcision” and “heathen” at the time this
agreement was made will shed real light on the nature of Paul’s ministry
and of God’s working in the Acts period.
If “the circumcision” in Gal. 2:9 is
simply a reference to “the circumcision in the flesh made by hands”
(i.e., physical circumcision), then clearly Paul violated the agreement
repeatedly. But is this really all there is to it? We think not. In
fact, Paul himself declares that there was a far more important
circumcision for a son of Abraham to have:
“For he is not a Jew, which is one
outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
‘But he is a Jew, which is one
INWARDLY; AND CIRCUMCISION IS THAT OF THE HEART, IN THE SPIRIT, and not
in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God (Rom. 2:28,29).”
There was “the circumcision in the
flesh made by hands “but there was also the necessity of the
circumcision that was inward, “that of the heart, in the spirit.”
It cannot be questioned that physical
circumcision plays a vital part in God’s program for the nation Israel.
Two passages concerning its institution help us understand this:
“And ye shall CIRCUMCISE THE FLESH of
your foreskin; and it shall be a TOKEN of the covenant betwixt me and
you” (Gen. 17:11).
“And he [Abraham] received THE SIGN
OF CIRCUMCISION (Rom. 4:11).
A token is a “signal” or “obvious
evidence,” as in Gen. 9:12,13 and Ex. 12:13. A sign is an “indicator,”
as John 20:30,31 demonstrates. Physical circumcision, then, was
instituted as the “obvious evidence” or “indication” of Israel’s very
special spiritual status. It was a token and sign of a far more
important circumcision available to the believers in that favored
nation. Consider, for example, these exhortations:
“CIRCUMCISE therefore the foreskin of
YOUR HEART, and be no more stiffnecked” (Deut. 10:16).
“CIRCUMCISE yourselves to the Lord,
and take away the foreskins of YOUR HEART (Jer. 4:4).
“...behold, their EAR IS
UNCIRCUMCISED, and they cannot hearken... “(Jer. 6: 10).
and all the house of Israel are
UNCIRCUMCISED IN THE HEART” (Jer. 9:26).
Plainly Israel’s outward, fleshly
circumcision was to be the token and sign of their inward circumcision.
In other words, it was to he the outward profession of an inward
possession. Looking forward to the coming kingdom age, Moses had
promised:
“And the Lord thy God will CIRCUMCISE
THINE HEART, AND THE HEART OF THY SEED, to love the Lord thy God with
all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live” (Deut.
30:6).
God Himself will one day do for and
in His chosen nation what they themselves pitifully failed to do under
the Sinatic covenant. This will be the operation of Ezekiel 36:26,27—one
of Israel’s “new covenant blessings.”
Simply being a physical descendant of
Abraham did not make one a true child of God, for the sons of Abraham
were the sons of Adam too. Hence our Lord declared to those who were
bold to claim, “Abraham is our father”:
‘Ye are of your father the devil, and
the lusts of your father ye will do. (John 8:44).
Physically, these leaders of Israel
were indeed Abraham’s sons—they had the outward profession; but
spiritually they were the children of the devil—they lacked the inward
possession! Physical circumcision was never the core of God’s concern
for Israel, it rather was a token, a sign of the real issue—their
internal, spiritual condition (see Psa. 51:16,17).
In this light, Stephen’s declaration
to the leaders of Israel in Acts 7:51 becomes far more significant. In
view of their continued rejection of their Messiah, he proclaims them to
be:
“Ye stiffnecked and UNCIRCUMCISED IN
HEART AND EARS
Clearly, then, there was an
“uncircumcised in heart and ears” group in the nation—one which was
being rejected and upon which God’s wrath was set to fall (see Luke
11:47-51, Acts 2:34-36,40, 1 Thess. 2:14-16). It was because of their
rejection of Him that our Lord had declared to this same group:
‘Therefore I say unto you, THE
KINGDOM OF GOD SHALL BE TAKEN FROM YOU, and given to a nation bringing
forth the fruits thereof” (Matt. 21:43).
We are not left in doubt as to the
identity of the nation to whom the kingdom was to be given—the nation
that would indeed bring forth the fruits of the kingdom. In Luke 12:32
Christ tells His disciples:
“Fear not, LITTLE FLOCK;
FOR IT IS YOUR FATHER’S GOOD PLEASURE TO GIVE YOU THE KINGDOM.”
This “little flock” comprised the
true circumcision, the believing remnant—those who inwardly possessed
what they outwardly professed. They were the “Israel of God.”
Thus, at the time of the Gal. 2:9
agreement, “the circumcision” would have clearly been a reference to the
Little Flock—the true circumcision. In light of the interruption of
their program, the Jerusalem apostles agreed to confine their ministry
to the Little Flock while Paul would go to the heathen.
THE HEATHEN
The term “heathen,” of course, refers
to the (Gentiles-the “nations.” It, also carries a deeper significance
in that it identifies those who found themselves outside the sphere
of God’s blessings. Its use in Gal. 2:9 is of particular
significance in this light, for with the appearance of Paul’s
ministry the favored status of the nation Israel changed:
“I say then, Have they stumbled that
they should fall? God forbid: but rather THROUGH THEIR [ISRAEL’S] FALL
[Acts 7] SALVATION IS COME UNTO THE GENTILES, for to provoke them
to jealousy.
“Now if the FALL OF THEM BE THE
RICHES OF THE WORLD, and the DIMINISHING OF THEM THE RICHES OF THE
GENTILES; how much more their fulness?”
“For if THE CASTING AWAY OF THEM BE
THE RECONCILING OF THE WORLD, what shall the receiving of them be, but
life from the dead?”
“For I would not, brethren, that ye
should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own
conceits; that BLINDNESS IN PART IS HAPPENED TO ISRAEL, UNTIL THE
FULNESS OF THE GENTILES BE COME IN” (Rom. 11:11, 12,15,25).
Thus at the time of the Gal. 2:9
agreement, the term “heathen” included not only the uncircumcised
Gentiles but also the “uncircumcised in heart and ears” among Israel.
Plainly, any unsaved Jew living at the time of Israel s national
blinding would be in the same situation as the Gentile—on the outside
looking in! Not being part of the true circumcision, they were outside
God’s “sphere of blessing,” being no more than a mere heathen.
Thus when Paul went into the
synagogues to preach Christ to his unsaved kinsmen, he did so not
because they still enjoyed the special privileged position of not being
“reckoned among the nations” (Num. 23:9), but rather he preached to them
because national Israel’s special status was now done away. The middle
wall of partition having been broken down, Paul could now proclaim:
“For THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THE JEW AND THE GREEK: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that
call upon him” (Rom. 10:12).
Paul’s commitment in Gal. 2:9 was
that he would preach to both “the uncircumcised” Gentile and the
“uncircumcised in heart and ear” Jew. Hence we can understand his custom
of going into the synagogues to preach the good news of salvation to
his lost kinsman according to the flesh.
MORE HELP
There are a number of
further issues which
have a helpful light shed on
them by properly
identifying the circumcision
and heathen of Gal.
~ 2:9. We briefly suggest a few
for our readers’
further study and
consideration:
First, the Gal. 2:9 agreement makes
it obvious that the fall of Israel and the change in their national
position did not take place prior to Paul’s ministry—otherwise, there
would be no purpose to the agreement at all.
The ministry of the Jerusalem
apostles was going forward on schedule prior to the raising up of Paul.
Indeed, it is only with Paul’s ministry that their program began to
break down.
Beyond this, however, there is help
on at least two issues with which those who recognize that the
dispensation of grace began subsequent to Pentecost must wrestle: (1)
Did the Pentecostal, kingdom saints become members of the Body of Christ
when the dispensation of grace began (usually termed the “Twelve in or
out” question)? and (2) Did the dispensation of grace begin before or
after Acts 28?
The first question is clearly
answered in the negative by Gal. 2:9. Both Paul and the Jerusalem
apostles plainly understood that the Little Flock had not become a part
of the new mystery program introduced through Paul.
One helpful ramification of this is
that we can thus understand that the books written by these brethren
(i.e., Heb. through Rev.) are directed to the Little Flock both then and
in the “ages to come” when their program will finally be brought to
fruition.
As to the contention that the
dispensation of grace began at or after Acts 28, Gal. 2:9 deals it a
devastating blow. The simple fact is that the middle wall of partition
had been broken down, the fall of Israel had taken place. The nation
Israel had lost its position of honor and had been reshaped by (God into
a position of dishonor, having interrupted His program with them, the
unsaved Jew was thus outside the sphere of blessing and thus counted in
unbelief among the heathen (Rom. 11:30-32).
That Paul knew the truth of the
setting aside of Israel in the earliest days of his ministry is clear
from the record (see Acts 26:16,17; 22:18). He built the whole of his
efforts on this basic change in God’s dealings. The simple fact is that
after the raising up of Paul, the only way an unbelieving Jew could have
any hope of salvation was through the mystery program revealed by Christ
to Paul.
This is no doubt why Paul declared to
the Jewish leaders at Rome that “for the hope of Israel I am bound with
this chain “(Acts 28:20) and yet also wrote to the Ephesians and
Colossians that he was in bonds for proclaiming “the mystery” committed
to his trust (Eph. 6:19,20, Col. 4:3).
When we compare verse with verse we
cannot avoid the conclusion that after the raising up of Paul the only
hope Israel had lay in the new message and program committed to him.
There is more—much more—that could be
said about all this, but we must conclude here. The reader will,
however, find much helpful light from Gal. 2:9 when the circumcision and
heathen are properly identified. Far from later breaking his word,
Paul’s conduct and ministry were totally consistent with both his
agreement and God’s working in the new program he proclaimed. Little
wonder he sought so vigorously
“… to preach the gospel, not where
Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man’s foundation”
(Rom. 15:20).
|