 |
| English: Map of the Letters of Galatia (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
In
the first entry in the Bible Junkies Online Commentary on Galatians, I
discussed introductory matters concerning the founding of the churches to the
Galatians, the situation when Paul wrote to them, when the letter might have
been written and the type of letters which Paul wrote, based on the common
Greco-Roman letters of his day. In
the second post, I considered the basic content and breakdown of a Pauline
letter. I noted the major sections of the formal letter structure and, in the
context of each section, outlined the theological and ethical (as well as
other) concerns of Paul, including some Greek words which will be examined more
fully as we continue with the commentary. In
the third entry, I looked at the salutation, which is long for Paul’s
corpus (only Romans 1:1-7 is longer) and briefly commented on the lack of a
Thanksgiving, the only letter of Paul’s which does not have one. The
fourth entry discussed the opening of the body of the letter, a significant
part of the letter especially in light of the absence of a Thanksgiving. In
the fifth entry, I examined the beginning of the opening of the body of the
letter, in which Paul describes his background in Judaism and I placed this in
the context of Judaism in the Hellenistic period. In this, the sixth post in
the online commentary, I continue to look at Paul’s biographical sketch of his
life, this concerning his earliest life as a Christian.
4. Paul’s Letter to the Galatians
d) Body of the Letter (1:13-6:10):
ii) Paul's Background in the Church 1 (1:18-24):
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. (NRSV)
Paul recalls his
initial visit with the Apostles in Jerusalem three years after his conversion,[1]
which includes he says only Peter (Cephas) and James the Lord’s brother. (1:18-24).
He then returned to Syria and Cilicia (his hometown of Tarsus was in Cilicia),
but his reputation had now spread to the churches in Judea.
The focus of this
section, as
noted last entry, is that Paul was not dependent upon any human being as
the source of his Gospel, but instead was guided by the “revelation” of Jesus
Christ. Here he states that he met Cephas only after three years. Cephas is
Aramaic for “rock” and though the identity of Cephas has been disputed, it
seems clear that it refers to Peter, which is Greek for “rock.” Why Paul uses
Cephas instead of Peter in a Greek letter is intriguing, but difficult to
answer. He might simply prefer Peter’s name in the mother tongue (see note
below). What Paul desires from Peter is also left vague.
Paul writes that he “I
did go up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days”
(1:18). What sort of “visit” was this? The verb used here, historêsai, can have the sense of gaining knowledge through face to
face encounter, so visit might work, but it also has the meaning of enquiring,
learning and examining a thing or a person. Given the context in this letter,
of Paul’s self-sufficiency in the Gospel, and then his acknowledgement that he
did “visit” Peter for fifteen days, I think it is best to understand Paul’s
visit as having the purpose of enquiring about Jesus’ earthly ministry and
Peter’s reminiscences about that ministry.[2]
Paul’s visit had as its purposes research
and personal contact.
Paul then defends
himself, it seems to me, against unknown interlocutors and charges – made by the
Galatians? The interlopers who were unsettling the Galatians? – that he saw no
other apostle “except James the Lord’s brother” (1:19). There is actually some
question as to whether this phrase means to exclude James from the apostles or
to include him among the apostles. Literally the Greek phrase which is
translated as “except” is “if not” (ei mê).
This could be adversative and mean “but”: “I did not see any other apostle, but (I
did see) James the Lord’s brother.” Or, it could mean “except”: “I did not
see any other apostle except James
the Lord’s brother.” I prefer “except,” even though James, the Lord’s brother
was not considered one of the twelve apostles. It seems clear, however, that “apostles”
was a broader category in the early Church than just the twelve, as we can see
in Romans 16:7, in which Andronicus and Junia are noted as apostles.
Who is this James?
It is not one of the twelve apostles, see
my outline of each James in the NT, but is clearly a relation of Jesus, the
one who was considered the first bishop of the Jerusalem church. We see this
James guiding the Church in Jerusalem not only in Galatians 2:9, 12, but in
Acts 15: 13 (and most likely Acts 12:17 and 21:18). Catholics, of course, deny
that Jesus had any full brothers or sisters and so would understand “brother”
in the broader sense of “relation” or “kinsman” or “cousin” (as for instance
Fitzmyer, NJBC, 783). Paul’s meeting
with James would be a recognition of James’ standing within the Jerusalem
church.
Paul then states, “In
what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!” (1:20). It is the vociferous
denial here which leads me to say, as above, that Paul is mounting a defense
against some charges thrown his way. What charges? That he has had more contact
with Jerusalem then he is letting on? That he is more dependent upon other
apostles than he wants them to know? Is this an attack on his apostleship? Paul’s
apostleship depends upon a religious experience, not an earthly ministry in
which he followed Jesus, so perhaps the charge leveled against him is that his
conversion cannot be trusted and he is only a follower of the apostles in Jerusalem not a leader, so
what kind of authority does he have? On the other hand, as we shall see, Paul
will want to align himself with the authority of the Jerusalem Church to
demonstrate that they accept him and do not reject his Gospel. It is a tight
wire he walks: I am an independent authority, but the apostles, who I did not
know and was not dependent upon, approve of and support my message.
Paul then summarizes
his next travels following his first Jerusalem visit with Peter and James,
three years after his conversion, saying he “went into the regions of Syria and
Cilicia” (1:21), which would include his home city of Tarsus and the major
early Christian center of Antioch. In Acts 13 and 14, Paul’s missionary
activities are outlined in this region and I suspect that this correlates with
the activity surveyed briefly in Galatians 1:21 but that cannot be certain.
Still, Paul was “still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea that are in
Christ; they only heard it said, “The one who formerly was persecuting us is
now proclaiming the faith he once tried to destroy.” And they glorified God
because of me” (1:22-24). Paul ends this section by again asserting his
dependent independence, focusing on his unique missionary activity, without the
support of the churches in Judea, including Jerusalem, but with their tacit support
since “they glorified God because of me.” What they knew of Paul was simply
that the persecutor had become a missionary for the Church.
Next entry, Paul travels to Jerusalem fourteen years later to
meet the Apostles.
John W. Martens
I
invite you to follow me on Twitter @Biblejunkies
I
encourage you to “Like” Biblejunkies on Facebook.
This entry is cross-posted at
America Magazine The Good Word
[1]
This period of three years could be reckoned two ways: a) three years after
Paul’s conversion; b) three years after his journey to Arabia and return to Damascus,
with the conversion, of course, preceding both the journey and return. Since we
do not know how long this sojourn in Arabia was, I think it best just to speak
of this as “three years after his conversion.”
[2]
As an aside, if they spoke in Aramaic during this fifteen day visit, could this
be the source of Paul’s use of Cephas and not Peter? That is, this is the name
and linguistic context for how Paul came to know Peter.
0 comments:
Post a Comment